pilotdave

I also have the Epson R-1800 and would highly recommend the R-800 (smaller version) or the 1800 if you wanna go big every once in a while. I've had a few HP printers before this one, and they were all ok. When I decided to get a real photo printer (my old HP could do photos but it wasn't really meant for that), I did a bunch of research and learned that Epson really has the egde in certain areas, such as long-life prints. I use a cheap HP photo printer at the DZ for direct printing from memory cards. The prints look good, but they'll be horribly faded within 6 months if they're hung on a wall. I've seen a print from an Epson 2200 (uses similar ink to the 1800/800) that was left in direct sunlight for years without fading. For glossy prints, the 800/1800 lays down a clear coat on top of the print. That just evens the glossiness, so different parts of the print with different amounts of ink don't look shinier than other parts. It also makes the prints water resistant. Ever got a drop of water on a regular inkjet print? Instantly ruined. Water can be wiped right off a print from this thing. Anyway, read reviews and look at prices, but I'm VERY happy with my 1800. Oh, the 1800 works fine for normal everyday printing too. Dave

Thanks for the link.... made a bunch of them last night and printed a couple on 13x19 paper. They look awesome. Need a magnifying glass to see some of the detail though! BTW, the 4-way exit has no repeated pictures in the mosaic. Building the collection of tiles to use is taking forever. But as I add more and more pics for the software to choose from, the quality of the mosaics keeps getting better and better. I think I have somewhere around 11,000 now and LOTS more to add. Dave

Diesel aircraft engines run on jet fuel, not diesel. If you want to be technical about it, no, a turbine engine is not at all effectively a diesel. They run on completely different thermodynamic cycles. These new aircraft diesels have a LOT of potential to really revolutionize piston aircraft. Extremely efficient, low maintenance, long life, much more environmentally friendly than avgas-burning pistons, etc. Only time will tell how they work in the long run, but this is really exciting stuff. Dave

I do most purchases like that from Amazon.com. Good prices, free shipping, never had a problem with them. Returned a digital camera to them once before... no issues. When I bought my last camera, I signed up for the amazon.com visa card too... $30 off, and the reward points for purchases go toward amazon gift certificates. I then use the gift certificates to buy ink for my printer most of the time. Dave

Nope, not the video I was thinking of then. There's at least one or two on there somewhere that show an outside view of a really fast flat spin. Dave

I can't watch it right now, so I hope this is the video I'm thinking it is... http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=3107 Dave

Yep, when I started jumping in the late 90s, nobody (at least most people that I was around) stowed the excess. It was something I was shown when I learned to pack, but the experienced jumpers showed me I could save time by skipping that step (although I always have stowed mine). A fatality or two later, I think most people are stowing their excess now. I was pretty shocked a couple years ago when I saw a jumper packing a brand new fancy rig that didn't have any place to stow the excess. No excuse for that... Dave

Bought my first rig (all in individual pieces) when I had around 40-50 jumps: PD150 Reflex At maybe 150 jumps I replaced the main with a Sabre2 135 and put the PD150 in the closet. At ~200 jumps I bought a Vector3. Moved the Sabre2 135 into it and still jump it, almost 1000 jumps later. Put the PD150 back into the reflex and still jump it as a backup rig. That's it... 2 mains, 2 containers, ~1200 jumps. No plans to downsize. Dave

Out of curiosity, where do you guys put the optimum 143 in terms of what it can replace? Do you have an updated sizing chart that shows optimum reserves? Dave

Oh I agree... but the original poster had a $700 budget. I'm just pointing out that she can get some great shots with equipment that costs a lot less than that (refurb rebel XT including kit lens was $500 months ago, don't know the current price). She could get even better shots if she doubled her budget, but a nice lens can be a later addition. Dave

You were there?? Hmmm, this you? http://www.skydivingstills.com/gallery/3563031#202430886 I woulda jumped with you. Oh well, you'll have to come back for that!

A good lens is better, but a kit lens is perfectly adequate for getting landing shots and other stuff around the DZ or wherever. Here are a few examples of ground shots I've taken with the canon 18-55 kit lens (easily found used for $65). Not as nice as yours (or the ones I'm getting with my 70-300), but you don't need to spend $500+ on a lens to take some pictures at the DZ. Dave

You need to change a setting in your video player. I don't have it open in front of me, but in windows media player, in the options, under performance, turn off "use video overlays" or something like that. Quicktime has a similar setting. Nothing to do with copyrights... it's caused by the way your video card is displaying the video. Dave

You're not serious, right? I don't think he's so off the mark. Nobody has any idea why that accident happened. The fact that he was jumping a wingsuit with less than the recommended minimum number of jumps MAY have been a contributing factor. But NOBODY knows. If the accident makes less experienced jumpers think twice before trying to push their limits, great. But saying that the wingsuit CAUSED the accident is nothing but speculation. Dave

Yeah, I've been jumping a skyhook-equipped rig for almost 4 years and I've only had a cutaway at my rigger's house. Really not worth writing about...the reserve didn't even come out.

Looks like they got the anxiety/pleasure labels backwards. Dave

I think that was Ronald Bruce Sirull. Yes, THAT guy... Dave

Get a 30mm lens...no step rings required. Dave

I was at Oshkosh in '96 and saw something I thought was kind of funny. A Wilga was there on display, right around the corner from a little homebuilt demonstrator. Can't remember what homebuilt it was... never made it onto the market. But they were letting anyone climb right in, all week long. Over at the Wilga, I saw one guy climbing up into it. A company rep yelled at him, "HEY! You can't get in it! If we let everyone climb in, there wouldn't be a plane left at the end of the show!" Thought it was pretty ironic, considering how big and tough a plane it is compared to the little homebuilt. Dave

I'd buy all used gear, if possible. Any modern container will work just fine. I personally chose the Vector3 after doing a lot of research, but it wasn't my first rig. Started with a reflex that was available used at a much more affordable price. Worked fine, still does... it's now my backup rig. Bought my second (and only other) canopy used too... saved about 20% or something by buying a canopy that was nearly brand new. New canopies suck. Dave

Ha! I agree on a used XT. Great camera and really cheap used. A decent lens for landing shots will be harder to come by cheap. But then again I took landing shots with the kit 18-55 for a long time and I was perfectly happy with them... No particular need to buy a better lens right off the bat. That can be next year's purchase. I wouldn't spend the extra money on an XTi. The cheaper Nikons could be good too for ground use. Nikon seems to have the edge when it comes to consumer-grade stuff, where canon does better at the pro-level. Dave

Apparently the porters that will be used in competition in France don't have steps at all. Good luck... http://www.skyleague.com/pages/news/showArticles.php?story=864 Dave

I'll go on a limb and take a guess on the aircraft type based on a quick google search... Douglas R4D-8 (or C-117 after 1962). Close? Dave

No idea... I just accepted the compliment. Dave

I don't know the answer to your question, but I think it's a lot easier to find an ideal video camera now than an ideal still camera. With video, you can find cameras in all shapes and sizes, and at least as far as consumer cameras go, quality is pretty independent of size and weight. With still cameras, it seems that quality is proportional to size and weight... finding the best still camera for freefall depends a lot on how much weight you're willing to carry (and how much money you will spend). All I know is that I'm going to cry the day my PC1000 dies. Got huge compliments once from a tandem student and her husband a few weeks after I shot her video. Her mom's video was shot on an HC3 the same load and they couldn't rave more about how much better the video looked from the PC1000 than the HC3. Better color, clearer, etc. I was more than a little surprised! Course that was standard def video... I won't be able to compete when tandem videos are presented in high def. Dave