yoink

From memory there aren't any dropzones within about 30 miles of Macclesfield...

I didn't even look at your experience or jumping history when I posted my advice - which is my mistake. Chuck is right. Tracking dives do have a higher than normal potential for turning into a zoo-way. Stay off the bigger ways until your skills are a bit more dialed in and that's not because I don't want you to have fun, but because you won't learn much, AND you'll be at risk. A good tracking dive is as planned as any FS jump. Everyone has a slot to fly and a planned approach. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be on that jump - it puts everyone in danger. The 8 or 10 ways sunset dives which used to get thrown together on the way to the plane were (now I'm looking back on it with experience), fucking stupid to put it lightly. Definitely get coaching - it's by far the safest and quickest way for you to proceed. Get the basics nailed with a good coach and you'll instantly start doing better. Being the guy who can reliably get to his slot on a dive ALWAYS gets noticed.

And therin lies the problem. What I've found is that as a general rule, is that I never see all of the problems when I'm designing something. I throw an idea out after careful consideration, and all sorts of issues get raised, and I'm left going 'how the hell didn't I think of that?' Every single thing you add needs to sum to add less of a snag hazard than a helmet cutaway. Seriously, I'm interested to see what you're thinking. I produced some basic 3D models of my idea. Next time I dig out my old PC I'll find em and post em. As a general rule in skydiving (or any engineering), the simpler you can make something, the better. My favorite quote from Antoine de Saint-Exupery Have fun thinking though! It will absolutely make you a better skydiver, particularly if you can stand the crucible of feedback that'll come! -Chuck - it's not pretty, but yeah. Simple and works everytime. No moving parts...

Unless your camera sits absolutely flush to the helmet (which it won't), there's a snag hazard on the mount. It may be between the mount and the helmet, or it may be between the mount and the camera. I've seen lines get caught under the rim of reasonably well packed pop-top containers, so that gives you an indication of just how small the gap needs to be to remove any snag hazard... The only way to remove the snag hazard is to completely enclose the camera in a smoothed shell than sits exactly snug to the contours of the helmet. I had similar ideas a couple of years ago and the closest I could come without it being a huge addition required a completely new helmet shell... You think skydiving helmets are expensive now? Think about the cost when you're manufacturing the shell with internal cable channels... It wasn't feasible. I'll throw some pics up of my doodles over the weekend for you. As an aside, I'd also start figuring out something other than a spring for stability. Firstly, they're not that stable unless you have a large number of them, and secondly they just add complication. There are definitely ways to achieve the stability without them. Think compressible materials... Other things to consider - anything which adds small points of pressure are a no-no. Screws, even plastic ones, are unacceptable in my opinion. Put pressure in the wrong place in a collision and it'll drive into your skull... I'd be interested to see what you're thinking of, but after looking at the idea for quite a while, I tend to agree with what others above me have posted. In an emergency, just get rid of everything on your head. It keeps the decision chain simple, and that's what you want in that situation. Other than cost, could you give 1 reason why it would be preferable to have a cutaway for your camera, but not for your helmet?

You've not been on enough tracking dives yet then... If you've got a decent rabbit who can maintain a constant fall rate and forward speed, everything else is your fault. It's a little harsh to put it like that, but it's true. If your rabbit can't do that, get a new one... Like everything else in skydiving, dress for success. Unless you know you're going on a maxed out dive, pick a suit that gives you a good range of fall rates. For me, it was always just a simple FF suit. No booties, nothing complicated. other than that, 2 way practice dives can be better for your progress than multiple way tracking dives. Get someone good to lead with video, then debrief properly after. They may need to cant their video mount slightly to get good video if you approach flat.

Lets rope him into writing it...

Good video is when the red light is blinking. I think the idea here is about camera safety for the GoPro crowd, not whether one can set up an artistic scene or debate SLR shutter speeds. Why have the difference between safety and good practice? If an understanding of lighting / shutter speeds is needed for shooting a tandem, then make that part of the course that you teach to everyone who wants to fly with a camera. If it isn't needed at all, don't teach it. I could see having 2 tiers of qualification though - one for video, and one for stills.

But equally, professional responsibility should play a part on the team. I'd rather not have to resort to imposing a quarantine on people who are doing their job, but I would expect them to monitor themselves and be bright enough to recognise the increased level of risk that they're working with and have the will power to limit their own habits until that risk is mitigated.

See, that annoys me as well. Everyone knows she's working with an extremely dangerous disease, yet there aren't any restrictions on travel for these people, even self imposed ones. It's just stupidity. While the disease is cooped up in a couple of people in Texas, it's manageable, but once you potentially start infecting hundreds of people in commercial traveling hubs, you've just made the job a whole fucktonne harder.

I'm not the biggest fan of 'mentors'. They're the informal version of instructors, and as such the quality you can get seems to vary wildly. Even the content of what would be taught would vary a lot I think. I'd much rather see a syllabus put together that camera coaches can teach from. Something that standardizes the requirements across all dropzones.

Nope. We're nowhere near that.

so for the instructors out there: have you ever given up on a student? At what point do you say 'fuck it' and go and teach someone who wants to learn?

Talk me thorough this argument, because to me this reads like: 'If a highly experienced jumper doesn't agree with me, they are, by definition, stuck in their ways.' There is no possibility in your mind that you're wrong, is there? Your arrogance is unbelievable. You are a poster child for why your own arguments of education don't work. Because of that fact, we have to treat everyone like they're children and impose arbitrary limits on them... Congrats. You're part of the problem that you're trying to 'solve'. You can't even read the SIM properly, and you're trying to establish that you're correct in changing safety recommendations? As has already been pointed out, most countries either suggest or require at least a C license before jumping camera. That's 200 jumps... So much of your argument has been based on 'nowhere saying 200 jumps'. Does that change your opinion now? I bet it doesn't... I ask again, how many jumps do you have, because here's my suspicion. You're not even nearly at the recommendation and trying to skip a few dozen with your mad skillz. You've probably got 40 or 50 jumps, would be my guess. How far off am I? From the UK rule book to reinforce the US SIM: I bet the Dutch regs are equally stringent.

Fire every single politician into the sun? Make it a criminal offense to personally profit from time in government?

Fixed it for you.

See, that's self justification again. It's a shitty learning tool if (as you say) you're planning to wear it and forget it. It's a fantastic learning tool if other people are filming you, or, if you're dedicating yourself to videography. Learning the distance to be from a 4-way team for your setup is learnt through multiple video jumps , but that's dedicated camera work, and this conversion is all about the 'set and forget' POV stuff. It's crap footage, and it's not a learning tool so don't bother using them as reasoning. Lets be honest - you're going to do whatever the hell you want to do.Which is exactly why your argument of 'education' is pointless too. Jump camera. I don't give a shit. Once again, this thread becomes a typical camera thread of: 'You're not as good as you think you are, and you don't understand and aren't able to mitigate all the risks' crowd, vs the 'you don't know me. I'm different' crowd. Like I said in my first post, I knew exactly how this thread would progress without even opening it, so rather than being argumentative for the hell of it, let me ask you an honest question: 'What would it take to make you think that a limit (xxx jumps, or xxxx skills) is necessary for jumping camera? I would also like to know exactly how many jumps you actually have.

Nope. Just that the experience that you do have is leading you to erroneous conclusions. That isn't the same as knowing nothing (although it does kinda feel like that when we're told we're wrong!) Thinking about stuff like this is good. It does keep you safe in the long run. But having asked the questions, we also need to be willing to hear the answers we're given. You correctly identified distraction as a major hazard to jumping camera, but then shrugged it off by saying (essentially) 'that won't happen to me'. Doesn't it make sense that everyone who got hurt said exactly the same thing? We've all made mistakes in the sport. Someone has a sig line here that is absolutely true: 'Nothing is more dangerous than breaking a BSR and getting away with it'.... In this vehemently anti-regulation sport, those rules that do exist tend to do so for a good reason. Pretty much all of them are written in blood. And for the coach course, I think it's amusing how you were thinking 1 jump with a coach to get signed off and I was thinking that if I was designing the qualification,the course would be much, much harder than that, and would require a number of different qualification jumps, much like the AFFI course and would be a serious commitment to complete. It wouldn't be something you knock out in a jump. Or even a weekend. Unless someone had spent serious time in the tunnel to master their in air skills, it's highly unlikely they'd be good enough to pass before a couple of hundred jumps. I'd get rid of the idea of 'just putting a camera on for me' being different to 'proper videography', and lump it all into a serious 'camera work' qualification. Either you do it right, or you don't fly camera, but when you DO have it, then you should be good to fly with freefall teams, CRW dogs or tandems (other prerequisites not withstanding)

What? please, identify the new and interesting ideas the OP has raised. The only ideas I see are: 1) 'educate jumpers who have less than 200 jumps' 2) 'most camera accidents do not relate to snags but distraction' and 3) 'you can educate me all you want but I'm going to do it anyway' All of these have been discussed ad nauseum. 1) Education isn't accepted by people who have already dismissed the lessons. As evidenced in the guys first post here. People who will listen to the education are generally getting it. People who won't listen, won't listen to ANY level of education. 2) You can't convince someone that jumping camera is a distraction if they think it won't be. Even if you can show that's the biggest cause of accidents out there. 3) why should I waste my time with either 1 or 2 when he's already decided, based on his extensive experience that he's only going to listen to someone saying 'hey. Great idea. Go for it.'? That's why he gets 'the usual' for it. The 'I know better' attitude and the instant dismissal of anything which doesn't conform to his conclusions. Hell, I knew exactly what this thread was going to be when I saw the title on the main forum page. and so spaketh a thousand other low time jumpers. History has taught us that despite best intentions, the camera remains a distraction, and complicates EPs and is best left to when you have the basics of skydiving sorted out. The 200 jump recommendation isn't a perfect solution, I'll admit that. Sometimes I think I'd prefer to see a Camera Flying 1 qualification which can be coached, in the same way FS / FF is, complete with lessons on flying, proximity, breakoff / deployment plans, gear selection etc. Until you prove you've got the skills, and have been shown how to do it safely, you don't get to strap a camera on period. If that takes you 500 jumps to get round to it, then so be it.

No. I think most PCITs are cause by misrigged gear - the bridle routed under the flaps in an incorrect sequence, and you could pull on it all day and it's not going to come free. I'd rather deal with a 2 out and have the altitude to do it.

I've always liked the MX-5. It's a fantastic little roadster. That said, I don't particularly like the styling on this one. The rear has too much Alpha / Fiat, the side looks like a Z4 without the interesting curves and the front just looks like a grinning anime character to me.

I dunno. I'd have lots of concerns as an instructor...If someone becomes incapacitated easily from spins, I'd worry about how they'd perform in a spinning mal situation. What happens if they burble an exit? Does unstable freefall incapacitate them as well? I agree a teaching tandem would be a good next step, but the reality is that there are situations that are out of our control as skydivers which might result in violent spins.... That said, if the student decides not to continue, the DZ has to refund the unspent money. Keeping it is unacceptable.

I think she has good reason to ban those two individuals. Extending the ban to all Muslims is stupid, prejudiced, and ignorant. and we have a winner... it's a publicity stunt. And I didn't need to give proof of US citizenship to go to a gun range in CA. Maybe Arkansas is different.

I'd be extremely surprised if any tunnel actually let you do this. Speak to them first and see if it's worth spending your time even looking. If it was my tunnel, the absolute last thing I'd want would be the possibility of loose objects being in the air.

To which I respectfully reply; "Mr Director, tough $#!T! Deal with it!" Of course a lot of this can be tied directly to that "thing" called the "Patriot Act." What an abomination on our rights. See, I don't believe that. I just think the Patriot Act made what was happening anyway more visable.

Right up until the point where people blame larger society when something bad happens to them. As a general rule, everyone's for increased risk for other people, but if something terrible happens to their child it's all 'how can this happen? How did the police not see this predator on chate rooms??' etc etc.