DSE

+1. Get your "almost scooter" and we'll ride over. Mine is half orange. And Grimmie, when you buy Randy Ottinger a beer, buy him a few for me too. That guy is a machine filled with ideas.

Indeed. Very nice, glad you gots it. Looking forward to flying w/you soon!

In a bigger wingsuit, I'd have to disagree. Your P2...not a big thing unless you're spinning A good friend just went into the water in Hawaii because he pulled at 2500 and ran into some problems. Thankfully he acted quickly and was under a good canopy by 1K. In a wingsuit, particularly with your level of experience, please reconsider adding a few hundred feet to your deployment altitude?

if you're on FB, I'm giving away a copy of Vegas this week. The entries this week have been...weak. give er' a go if you got something creative

I *believe* this was corrected. I also believe the online version will include some video of water training. The 2011 SIM should be coming sometime soon.

I haven't seen the Opteka, but betting it vignettes too. it's a .2 lens on an already wide host.

Yes, skip the first 10:30 ride to altitude. Give the dude a break. It was his first camera jump, borrowed camera helmet from someone, demo jump on a Pulse, and "The lowest I've ever pulled, dude!!! Scared the sh**outta me" jump. Oh, he has 50 jumps. Were it my video, I'd apologize.

~just because others pull lower and no one says anything doesn't make it any more right for them than you. ~Just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you *should* do something. And that said...if you plan to deploy low, be sure your spotting skills are on. This guy got out at 5K, had plenty of time to deploy (you can hear his audible tones), and didn't deploy til quite low. Others on his load made it back. He didn't.

it should be made clear to everyone that DSLR filmmaking is a niche market, one that is destined to remain small in the real world, and will quickly be replaced (IMO) by 4:3 cameras. Let's look at the list again... 24p (most video cameras do this already, have for a decade) Shallow DOF (any 2/3 camera does this as well as any DSLR, and can actually go more shallow with similar light sensitivity and greater dynamic range balance) Progressive (most high end cameras can do this, and CCD cams do this without rolling shutter/jello which is a real issue with the DSLR cams). Color (gets hosed in AVC compression) There certainly are upsides, big ones for the careful guy who wants to make great movies. But the compression of these cameras also carries huge issues, and when you combine DOF with the compression, those issues can become a lot more prevalent. Not to mention very few NLE systems can manage the native files from the DSLR's, so a transcode (greater time and quality loss) is required. To sum up... Walk this path carefully, do your research, understand where they are and are not good tool choices. If by any chance you're in the NYC area, I'm doing two days of seminar on DSLR production at the Javits Center starting tomorrow morning. Passes are 600.00 but I've got a couple freebies.

At Elsinore, the rule is pretty simple, and issues are fairly rare. Light/variable winds; land towards the lake. If you do not want to land towards the lake, go to the student landing area, to the pond area (look out for swoopers), or to the open fields to the west or north. Worst case, head for the empty field (private property) to the west

"Demolished?" Lemme guess...you carry a special shrink to fit ruler, too? What you're agreeing to now is what I said earlier. The basics are already there. How they're implemented is a different story. You failed to explain why advanced training post AFF is a bad thing. Do you often disagree with yourself?

They showed this back in April at NAB for a June release. Nice to see it's actually happening.

How so? Tony has a sleeve which works "OK" assuming the wearer isn't sweaty. I've seen one suit where the guy essentially tore the zipper out to get his arm free. PF or BM, just pull the cutaway cable. In the event of an FFC (which is what we're talking about here, right?) it's gonna be an Intro with the unclipped wing, so reach for the risers prayer, and if it's a Prodigy, pull the snaps, and if it's an Acro or P2, pull the cables. If it's an Intro with the shackles attached, pull the shackle releases (generally shackles shouldn't be connected on a first jump, but people have been known to be in Xbirds on first wingsuit jumps, too). All different, but don't blow the differences into big proportions.

-I don't sit down to get my PF legs in and legstraps on (although I encourage my students do so) it's not required, in other words. -Handles are in the same place on ALL systems (providing your Jii doesn't suck em' in). -True, PF suits all have cutaways and Tony doesn't. I don't think this qualifies as a "significant difference" as relates to FFC. People are trained to not pull their cutaway handles in flight during their instability recovery training. -Different TS are out there. Last years? Two years ago? four years ago? They're quite different. 3-4 years ago, TS were essentially the same entry as PF and BM. There are still a lot of those suits being used for training. Last week, I had 6 FFCs training at once. Each guy got the same training, even though I had people in 3 brands of suits. Each guy got a 1-1 on his particular suit. Some have grippers, some don't, some have cutaways, others don't, my Phantom 1 has an LQRS system too, so the student gets briefed on that handle too. In short, it's not much about the suit, it's all about the coach. Hopefully coaches have seen a variety of suits and experienced at least a couple suits by the time they hit the required 100 jumps. A smart coach looks at all the angles and understands them, and trains accordingly. A suit malfunction has never killed anyone and likely won't. Bad instruction has and will. Ask Dan Kulpa.

Why? How is an Intro dramatically different from a P2 or Prodigy different from a GTI (if the GTI had zips vs laces)? Handle placement is the same, wings are essentially the same, getting in/out of the suit is essentially the same. Now that the manufacturers have all moved away from lace-ups/cabling...there are very few significant differences. I teach students the same way whether they're wearing my P2's, Intros, or GTI. It just takes more time with the GTI than the others due to the cabling. Ditto for coaching with Acro or Prodigy. I'd be curious to hear thoughts from others that own multiple brands of introductory suits?

There is a video on YouTube of Jari doing an FFC with "the first female Indian wingsuiter" (actually at least the second), and the suit being used is either a modified Prodigy or a copy of the Prodigy. This suggests that somewhere in the near future, Birdman Inc will rise from the ashes of Birdman Oy. Even more...it further illustrates that manufacturers should be out of the "rating" game. Back to point, it shows that any beginning suit can effectively be used for training, regardless of the rating.

I don't have mod rights for this forum, so can't lock/move the thread. However, I tend to think this thread is in the right place anyway, so that Incidents doesn't get bogged down in the morality/ethic of under 18 y/o skydiving. I don't have a problem with the 17 y/o skydiving. For my children to ride motox, a waiver has to be signed. For them to play football, same answer. High school football hardly hasn't had a year without a fatality in recorded history (712 deaths since 1930) Thousands of spinal injuries/permanent damage. My point being, parents are already signing the rights of their children away. Hopefully it's with some forethought. We have 9 y/o doing tandems in Australia and New Zealand. How many incidents occur there? Not many. (not that I'm recommending 9 y/o for AFF, merely making a point about parent/child rights). It's the training and culture that contribute more than thought process and maturity, IMO. Certainly... age contributes to maturity and rational thought, yet even the most seasoned, experienced (older) skydivers have incidents like these. Is it any more or less tragic that the skydiver in this case is 17 vs 18 or 45? Do a few months convert this from a tragedy to "another incident due to a low turn?" I think the "huge liability" for age of majority cases is becoming pretty muddy with all the "extreme" activities in which youth are participating with parental consent. If a parent can't consent for their 17y/o child to skydive, then by that same argument they also cannot consent to that same 17 y/o having high risk surgery, right?

So you ARE seeing it on the timeline. Sounds to me that you're describing interlace issues vs ghosting. Render to a progressive format, see if you still see it. Render to same as project settings.

First off, I think you meant "no one under 18, right? Second, had she been 18, are you certain the outcome would have been different? Seems to me the only point of valid discussion isn't the decision-making process of a 17 vs 18 y/o, but rather the liability concerns for all parties involved?

I did much the same, Lazslo. Picked up a few CX100's new in boxes for sub 225.00 I even was able to get red ones (they go faster). Now that all of these cams are using the same sensor block and are 1920 vs 1440, the differences are negligible.

He's not *that* new. With perhaps 20-30 jumps with the Ghost and several more in Prodigys, Intro's, and Phantoms prior, I'm gonna point to other things being the issue. But he did make a bad decision that put him in the water. Glad he's OK.

For skcydiving, it's hard to get your shorts knotted up over one vs the other. As long as it's Sony, the stabilization is predictable. I don't like any of em' post CX100 for the bottom load, but the image quaiity is half a dozen of one and six of the other. they're all quite nice.

bring yer axe to S'nore...we'll jam when the jumpin' is done.

it's all about the skills. A flat top helmet will generally exhibit fewer stabilization issues than a chin-cup/front entry type of helmet.