pilotdave

You're STILL not a retired old fart?? Another engineer here. Dave

Legally or possibly? Legally, definitely not. Possibly? I really doubt it'd get off the ground with 2 people on board but who knows. Dave

Hahaha. That's really funny. (I hope they meant it to be funny...) Dave

Ya know, there's a line of code on skydivingmovies.com that writes all the file information to the database when a file is uploaded. All gets written EXCEPT the username of the person that uploaded the video. I have no idea why it doesn't work. It must be a sign of some sort though. Dave

High winds at willison? Better off on a 220 than a 300. Dave

Good thing you're in Australia... That woulda been SO illegal in the US. Dave

YOURS doesn't have Tetris?? What version do you have?? I never play tetris on the way up... I prefer Doom3. But that's still in beta. Naah I don't think they're worried about tetris on the way up... it's tetris on the way down that gets scary. Dave

Paralog is the only option. The Neptune's communication protocol is proprietary. The reason they're so careful about it is that the neptune is capable of 2-way communications. In other words, you can write to it. They don't want anyone screwing with the neptune's software, or writing any code that could inadvertantly alter the workings. Dave

I started wearing weights on AFF 3. Eventually I was just put with lighter instructors which helped a lot. But as soon as I got my A license and started doing RW, weights were definitely necessary. If you need em, you need em. Only your instructors, who've seen your body position, can really judge that. Dave

Control Panel is a utility used by field service members to diagnose neptune problems and change user settings. To access the logbook, you want Paralog: http://www.paralog.net/. Dave

Moved to http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=2217 Dave

Sorry for the delay: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=2214 Dave

First, why the hell am I relpying to this thread AGAIN? Second, PLEASE tell me about a skydive where the jumper is SAFER by going on the skydive than not going on it. Bill's comment was that cypres-reliant jumpers MAY be safer by NOT skydiving. That's really freaking profound. I'm sick right now and might not be able to jump this weekend, then I think I might be busy the next 2 weekends so I'm not in a very good mood right now... So maybe it's just me, but does it seem to anyone else that we're all arguing with a wall? It's like every comment you guys make has nothing to do with any argument I make. I FREAKING GET IT that it's dangerous to go on a jump you're not ready for, cypres or not. THAT'S NOT THE SITUATION I'M TALKING ABOUT. I'm going to bed. Dave

MAY be safer?? You've gotta be kidding me. You'd be a whole lot safer if you'd quit jumping (assuming you don't go replace skydiving with something more dangerous). ANYONE would be safer sitting out ANY skydive. That goes without saying. A person is not SAFER because he is WILLING to jump without a cypres. THERE ARE CASES where a skydiver uses a cypres as an innapropriate confidence builder. No argument there. But is choosing to use a cypres for CERTAIN, higher risk jumps a sign of reliance for a skydiver with the demonstrated skill to accomplish those jumps? I know you're not going to agree with me, and I'm not going to agree with you...yet. Gimme 15 years. Dave

Aerodynamically, that's a very poor design for a wing. Pressure will naturally increase toward the trailing edge... that's a positive pressure gradient. That's not a good thing. Lower pressure sort of "sucks" the air around the wing. Increasing pressure has the opposite effect, like pushing against the flow of air. This leads to separation of the boundary layer. An efficient wing places the separation as far back as possible. The whole purpose of those little turbulators (or whatever they call them) on the leading edge of some of the modern wingsuits is to delay this effect. Dave

Now you have me confused (). People that refuse to ever skydive without an AAD are too reliant on them. AND people that will do a certain jump ONLY if they have an AAD are also too reliant? "too dangerous" is a personal choice. Who are you to say a skydive is "too dangerous" for somebody else? Sure, you might know somebody doesn't have the skill to handle a certain jump safely...that's fine. But lets talk about the 400 world class skydivers on this 400 way. They've all got the skill. They are allowed to choose where their risk threshold lies. It may lie right smack between TOO RISKY without an AAD and ACCEPTABLY RISKY with an AAD. The AAD only lowers risk by some certain amount. It's not going to magically prevent any accidents. But it does lower risk. Why be proud of a skydiver that will take that extra risk? I mean, I don't care one way or the other if someone on a 400 way will jump without an AAD. I wouldn't call him an idiot for doing it. But I wouldn't congratulate him for being so macho either [yeah, I know I'll get yelled at for that line! ]. It's his choice. Dave

Do you consider it to be an intelligent choice to attempt a 400-way without an AAD? The risk of a freefall collision is significantly higher on a 400-way than on a solo. It'll probably start from a significantly higher than normal altitude too, where oxygen system malfunctions have been problems on big ways before. Higher risk is a given. Using an AAD doesn't lower one's chance of a freefall collision or passing out from hypoxia. It's a backup in case those things happen. In theory, an AAD increases one's chance of surviving such a jump. Why in the world do you have a problem with somebody that would only choose to do such a jump with that added protection (regardless of whether or not he could be talked into it at the last minute)? AADs can fail, blah blah blah. THEY CAN WORK TOO! Dave

The concept here is "acceptable risk." Just because someone accepts higher risk to avoid screwing up 399 other people doesn't change anything. There are plenty of people that would "NEVER" jump without an AAD that would go right ahead and do it with all that peer pressure. I bet you could find a lot of people that would sacrifice safety in many other ways in order to accomplish a goal like that. Dave

FYI that link is gonna confuse a lot of people... use http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=2206. Dave

Linked exit video: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1545 Airborne, since you're so good, why don't you post a sample tandem video you shot. Just prove you've got the skill you say you have and you might get some respect. Dave

Forgot that I got some pics... Dave

He was comparing them to the criminology majors! They're a wild bunch! Dave

That's cool. Can't remember the capacitance, but a couple friends of mine in college made a rail gun using a giant capacitor (3 feet tall or so, couple hundred pounds including the oil inside as the insulator). Ended up doing nothing but welding the projectile to the rail when they tried firing it. But they'd have had a lot of fun with a few of these things. Dave

If you right click on his username in the ad, and then hit "copy shortcut", you can then paste his email address into a new email. You can do the same thing on the "contact seller" link in the ad. Or hit the link to his user profile and use the button at the bottom of the page that comes up to send him a private message. Dave

Ok Ron, your turn. You're at 400 feet, skyhook equipped rig, and someone flies through your canopy, destroying it. Do you cut away or just pull your reserve? Based on your statement that I quoted above, I'd guess you'd follow your standard emergency procedure for a low altitude malfunction and just pull your reserve. Right? What evidence have you seen that suggests that cutting away was the more dangerous choice? Also, just for the record, if I was in that situation, I'd be so freaking scared I can only hope I'd have the brain power to do SOMETHING. I can't even imagine how much guts it would take to cut away at that altitude even if it was 100% PROVEN to be the best course of action. Dave