Calvin19

I think we are just two idiots who can't figure out we are talking about the exact same thing. You just like longer dive recovery and more average speed, I like short recovery and the ability to go slow if I want, but never as fast as you. a GLX would be better for big mountain soaring for sure, but that is terrifying! bottom line is, don't use a GLX or a lame skydive canopy on the hills I fly easily with my not as fast but better glide ships, it breaks legs! I don't go out in epic winds with my glider, sure Ill go soar in 15-20kt, but never more. scary!

not exactly sure what we are arguing here, but whatev. for me, I like following terrain, through trees, on the slope, and fast recovery arc. I like getting above my glider or all the way around it a lot down the mountain. on a 300m slope I can do 5 hard dives and a few rolls in a bullet 12. on a GLX 135 half the slope is used up gaining speed or preparing for landing. the GLX is way better for huge terrain and the desire to gosuper fast with long dives than a bullet or nano. but it takes a huge amount of speed in comparison to fly. I prefer and recommend purpose-designed speed gliders and harnesses (like the GLX, bullet, skim, nano, HLRCR, ect) because the purpose built gliders perform better in my opinion. they also are safer. A recent injury in Colorado, and a very bad one in Hawaii was SPECIFICALLY caused by inferior skydiving equipment being used for ground launching. with a little training and the right gear, both accidents would have been easily prevented. -SPACE-

I really don't understand what you're saying there, from my research (not too extensive, that is why I am discussing), paragliding speed flying canopies (nano, bullet etc) and paragliders will be more inclined to 'frontal' collapse with a substancial amount of front riser input? They have speed bars and trim tabs etc. but those are calculated to remain within a stable position and not exceed? any more input than that would be potentially fatal? That is why you see 'speed fliers' using toggles and 'ground launchers' using risers? Please correct me if I am wrong, but that is how I see it and being a swooper I will be inclined to fly with risers, until a point where parachutes are proven to fly faster without! It is all a difference in equipment and desired flight. some speed gliders are designed for fastest recovery and good glide, meaning they are like paragliders, and a hard harness turn is all the pilot needs to get desired "swoop". some speed gliders are modeled after swooping canopies and perform the same, and using riser input is ok. (some speed gliders have trimmers set to max safe riser input, any more could exceed the critical negative AOA creating negative lift and creating a collapse. I ground launch my speed gliders and paragliders, "foot launching" is just the way to get in the air. in my experience parachutes in the foot launching world perform considerably worse in all ways compared to their specific design paraglider counterparts. (IE a Stilletto 135 would have a significantly poorer glide ratio, speed and sink rate than a Bullet 12m[same size pretty much] and same with a Velocity 90(or whatever) compared to a Bullet GT 7m. where if "skydive swooping" was the goal, may not be as long, but just as fast or faster. it's all a different approach to what you want to do. I

I hear ya, Even the crop sensor in my Canon 450d gets the noise issues. 35mm sensor in a Point and shoot camera would be pretty awesome. heavy optics for that though.

I don't really understand that website, what is special about it? I have been coming around to those SX200s. forgive my ignorance, but is there ever a OS hack for point and shoot cameras? or any cameras? I really really want a point and shoot camera I can do 1000sec exposures with. I hate lugging a SLR around just for night pictures. -SPACE-

Very dangerous waters, but I have no interest in swooping. It's the aerodynamics that appeal to me. innovative engineering. I like relative motion, (not playing chicken with the ground on a swoop) -SPACE-

I have two of the HD gopros. I am looking for a point/shoot with manual settings for NON-pov photography.

yeah, but like I said, the problem here is your dealing with parachutes. I have worked on a variable geometry ram air canopy before, it is very difficult. and it was not even used for freefall. here is a very old version of something I was working on. there is other stuff in here that might be of use.http://www.expandingknowledge.com/Jerome/PG/History/Strange/Image/WING_SurfaceReduction_Center_PG_1998_09_p45.jpg Paragliders, while the goal is much more efficient flight than getting a ton of speed and skidding across the ground for the longest distance, aerodynamics of ram air gliders cross over to both sports. http://www.expandingknowledge.com/Jerome/PG/History/Strange/Album.htm I think the way swooping should go is get away from the sport of skydiving.

I figured you knew about that. in old PG design, there was ideas for full-flying risers, meaning the riser was infinitely adjustable. (meaning that the AOA of the glider was infinitely adjustable). the only control in paragliders and parachutes is camber, and a small amount of indirect AOA control. for the most part, brakes are very inefficient as swoopers have figured out long ago and started using front and rear riser input as much as possible. If you want the MOST efficient control, you will have to abandon the illusion of simplicity. the secret to better swooping is 1-even span and cordwise camber control, 2-less line, and in my opinion, a 3- smaller cross section harness. The only problem with swooping is you have to involve a parachute.

It has existed for years in paragliding. only WAY better. and in speed flying. it is complicated in a PG rig, but on a simple 4-riser Ozone Bullet paraglider there is 'trim tabs' on the front risers, when pulled in they create an airfoil with a lower angle of attack, making the lift vector of the glider angled farther away from the gravity/weight vector. this allows for much higher speeds in maneuvering and longer dive recovery. in PG as well as PPG (paragliding, powered paragliding) nearly all gliders have a acceleration system, and it is a very refined AOA control system, instead of the extremely crude and inneficient "front riser input" of a skydive canopy, it contours the entire airfoil of a glider for less AOA. here is a good example of the accelerator system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragliding#Control On most PPG gliders, there are trim tabs in the aft section of risers, and function in reverse of trimmers on a speed glider by increasing the AOA uniformly across the glider and allowing slower launches and landings with a heavy motor. Someone was trying compare aircraft flaps earlier, it does not work like that. we are flying kites on strings, the aerodynamics are very different from conventional aircraft. there is much less "positive control" of the airfoil. -SPACE-

I also removed the crappy leash. camera is glued in place, if there is a line snag, the camera is not worth going in from a bridal wrap. (but the leash would break anyway, under any kind of substantial load)

I have used and product tested both. the contour sucks. Stick with the gopro. I know it looks like a plastic cancerous tumor, but it kicks ass in all ways but the Contour's ease of flipping "record" switch. I mounted mine (Vholdr) with the goggle mount, but I super glued the mount to the helmet and then put ski goggles in place. I saw the ContourHD fall off a friend of mine on a two-way, so I glued mine in. never had a problem with the gopro mounts, but I started to glue them as well. (glue in addition to the 3M adhesive, then pressure clamped and cured overnight.)

that looks like a killer camera, and I looked at it a while ago but it does not have HD. half of this is so I can bring my goproHD for helmet camera, and this point and shoot for handheld shooting on a jump or flight. I think I might have to wait until the SD990 template becomes HD capable. (it's the same template as the SD550) thanks! still open to other brands, but I am glad the recs are for Canon. Represent.

Word. Video games don't belong in the cockpit. Dead reckon that shit or stick to Xbox.

SO, I am looking to upgrade my point and shoot camera. I currently use and have been using a Canon SD550 and have had 5 of them. (all bought used, I use my cameras hard for UE and BASE and they get wet/dropped a lot. Don't judge) I do not use it for freefall photography. The canons have the best manual setting I have found, but I am open to other brands. my best choice so far is the Canon SD940. I am looking for recommendations for my needs: 1-point and shoot camera (small jeans-pocket-esque (obviously)) 2-wide (28mm or shorter focal length [the 35mm equivalent]) 3-manual settings for ISO and Shutter speed to at least 1600 and 15seconds, respectively. Bulb would be AWESOME. 4-at least 7MP sensor resolution 5-HD video recording. (720p or 1080p) 6-NO TOUCH SCREEN 7-if possible, quickly change from manual to auto mode. thoughts? I have found Canon does this stuff the best, but I do not like their new SD940 template button/menu interface. I found the SD550 had super fast easy switching between modes that I use a lot. the SD940 has only one setting for still pics, as opposed to the 550 that I can switch betweein manual mode and auto mode in a half second. in the SD940/960/980 it has to be done in menu and takes about 10 seconds. -SPACE-

SHINY thanks!

Looking for a simple focal length to field of view angle chart (35mm equivelent Focal length to field of view angle in radians or degrees), anyone know where I can find something like that? I understand the sensor shape/size is the function, but I want something that has the 35mm equivalents, I can convert all other FLs to that.

I don't think landing gear is the thing. I think the reason we can't jump smaller canopies effectively is because we have a fixed amount of parasite drag cross section. -SPACE-

we are flying kites on strings, the simple "more lift/less lift/drag" statements mean very little. RDS removes parasite drag from the fulcrum. allowing the fulcrum (airfoil) to fly at lower angles of attack (and thus farther ahead of the load[pilot]) and move the vector of "lift" to be more ahead of the "drag" vector.

I started losing my hair at 22.

I don't care how many reasons anyone can come up with to show that non-apple products and software are overpriced or that there are 'better' computers or phones to be used, there is NO ARGUMENT over the superior quality of the macintosh customer service, and product, in function, design, and aesthetics for the 'standard' human user. -SPACE-

+1

word. I'll start a different thread about container. I am DEFINITELY going to get something with dynamic corners, I had a Mirage G3 built for a 135 and for 60 jumps I put my dagger 222 in it as well as 5 jumps I put a CUS Blackjack 260 in there with the corners cut open. worked GREAT. (freepacked, of course) Jay E? he da man.

I agree that a small elliptical canopy is bad for WS. but I don't really have the funds for 2 rigs, my skydive rig will for some part not be for skydiving. (partially as a dual parachute system 'reserve' for the [legal] PG jumps I am going to continue doing) being at 18,000' under a paraglider, with the ability to fly a state or two away and sink in dead air at 200'/min [as opposed to 1000'/min under skydive gear] is an interesting situation. lots of dropzone logistics, airspace issues, etc.

word. I was a convert as well. 4 years a Mac user and I cannot imagine ever using shitty Microsoft stuff again. Iphone 3G 16gb UB2 Macbook Pro 3.06/8gb