DSE

I really don't understand why you all are comparing cameras like sony cx100-105 to cameras like GoPro HD / Countour HD... There's really no comparison at this moment, no point in trying to compare... Really funny to read all those comments that GoPro isn't up to par with full fledged cams like Sony.. It was never made to be on par! Maybe once you start flying a camera, you'll understand better. The GoProHD is a very valid comparison to the CX100, for example. Maybe you can tell us a few of the reasons why?

Nice piece. Interesting you'd comment that you find it less colorful. IMO, it's more saturated (scopes bear this out too) but "colorful" is a subjective issue. It's certainly not as sharp nor contrasted, but for the price...it's a great cam (as you say). They're also tough as nails. Saw one do well over a dozen tumbles when torn from a helmet during a botched swoop (in the non-waterproof case). Dusted it off, blew out the card port, and it was playing nicely. Keep in mind that as you convert to QT, it's a process. Technically a postprocess. Depending on which codec you used in the conversion to QT, there are any number of small weirdnesses that can occur during transcode. Unless Trunk or someone else has taken one apart and figured out an on/off indicator via either the USB port (I don't know that it passes this information) or can figure out a hack for the internal indicator, I don't know that you'll find an external on/off indicator.

I agree entirely. In this particular incident, it seems that some think that the high speed was the primary cause when in fact, it was not. A slower speed would have almost assuredly ended with the same result. Higher airspeed does not always result in a tailstrike (rarely, in fact). Fully opening a wing on exit at any speed almost assures a very near miss or tail strike on a side exit aircraft.

Your post is meaningless without video. Duh, really?? Has it been argued that any different result would occur? Nope. Nice attempt to divert the context of the discussion tho. That is NOT the argument taking place here. You're of the opinion that airspeed is to blame here. It's not. 3 others exited at the same speed; all were fine. Far more tailstrikes have occurred at "normal" and slower speeds than at high speeds. Because of technique. We're not interested in acquiring more lift, we're interested in missing the tail. And regardless of airspeed, we're able to successfully do so, using techniques that are consistent. Experienced wingsuiters know how to deal with exits regardless of speed, and we don't have to distract the pilot to do so.

Wrong. technique is the primary cause. The same faulty technique would likely turn up the same exact result regardless of airspeed (with regard to this particular instance) How you keep missing the point is beyond me; a thousand high speed exits occurred in the week with zero tail strike. At least 100 exits post that day have been high speed, no tail strike, One person went ahead, and two behind the fatality, none of these three had tail strikes. Airspeed isn't nearly as relevant as you seem to think it is. Tell ya what...try this instead. Get a flatbed pickup, stand on the back while wearing your wingsuit. Speed the truck up to 65mph, as that's about as slow as any of us are going to be exiting. Once you've hit speed, open up fully. See what happens at extremely low speeds. You've been given a shot at changing my mind, waiting on that data over here. Please demonstrate your point.

Arguing about it is like trying to teach that ole' pig to sing. Yes, high speed increases risk. For everyone. But you're still moving forward at a similar speed to the aircraft regardless of the speed of the aircraft. The risk is even greater when wings are opened, regardless of speed. Pounding on the brakes as you enter the freeway no matter how fast you're going when you enter is generally a bad idea. Ever seen a dragster deploy a drag chute? I'm not "stuck" with an argument. My instinct, my experience, Jan's data all support my position, but if you can definitively show that there are more tail strikes of wingsuiters at high speed than there are tail strikes of wingsuiters at normal speeds, I'll change my position. Given that we do teardrops on most every jump run, the speed is 5-7kts higher than those exiting ahead of me. I specifically spoke with the pilot about this yesterday. His "instinctive" thougth was basically the same thing I'm saying. Yet I haven't hit the tail, and only come close when wearing my tall camera helmet. Deploying an airbrake (at any speed) in front of the horizontal stabilizer is incredibly dangerous, and is going to likely be the primary cause of said tailstrike. Same with deploying a PC straight out the door. It's not terribly different. As mentioned in the other thread; Get out at 500 feet and don't deploy, you're just as gone as the guy that went out at 13,500. He just has more time to realize his mistake. Once you cross the threshold, an impact directly on the back, neck, or thoracic cavity is most likely to leave you with a very bad day. We're way beyond the threshold at 85kts and higher. We can gain *some*altitude on the door at virtually any speed with open wings. Does a slower speed give you marginal decrease in risk? Of course it does. Who gives a shit? Your wing is supposed to be closed until you see the tail. Whether you're going 75kts or 115kts. This is why (gasp) people exit Cessna's and King Airs every day, yet don't hit the tail. The jumper isn't asking the pilot, "What's our airspeed?" but rather exiting (hopefully) in a consistent manner that avoids the tail. I guess I keep coming from the perspective of this particular incident, because what happened is very clear. And it had nothing to do with airspeed. Why you insist on confusing the issue is well beyond me. Maybe you prefer distracting the pilot on jumprun as he's trying to turn the plane and level it out? Again...prove me wrong. The fatality database is pretty clear, USPA has solid records; demonstrate that high speed exits have caused more fatal tailstrikes than standard speed exits. I'm somewhat surprised no one is talking about ground altitude, exit altitude, landing altitude, and an AAD. Seems to be a bigger learning point in my view. I know you need to blame someone and or something. That's understandable. But there is nothing here to blame except technique.

pudding Not necessarily correct. There are historical references to both, one relating to having put the King's game in a birdbag, the other dealing with tasting the pudding. But if it makes you feel better...

Ann Wilson rocks hard but... I can't believe no one has mentioned Bonnie Raitt yet. Close call for me but Bonnie gets my vote. I struggle with putting Bonnie Raitt in the same category as most of the names here, but she's very gifted as well. Got to share the stage with her at Roskiilde, Denmark a while back, and she's as nice and real as she is talented and tough. Like Ann Wilson, she's got the range, timbre, and tone of a great. Half the names on the above posts are nasally, whiny wish-I-was's, IMO.

Not gonna keep arguing with you on this one, Ed, but the proof is in the putting, and the proof is that more camera flyers and fun jumpers have had tail strikes than wingsuits have. The speed of the aircraft isn't nearly as relevant by comparison, and Jan's data proves this.

I agree that she has a better stage presence. But voice quality? Can't agree there.

1-1400+ 2-Two 3-One baglock, one lineover with twists.

Ann Wilson, hands down. Stevie Nicks, Lita Ford, Pat Benatar, Cass Elliot, Janis Joplin; they're all great. I'd wager that Ann Wilson has the most hits, greatest continual presence, and power. Even in her now-obese state, she continues to belt em' out like she was 22, IMO.

I have a NeoXS and it's great. Had it for just over two years, no issues at all. The Skytronic isn't built nearly as well (plastic vs metal).

Read the paper Jan Meyer linked to in the Incidents forum. It points out pretty clearly that while airspeed plays a role in the likelihood of a tail strike, it's a relatively minor role. Seems to me someone else thought that too, but there is a difference between instinct and data. Hopefully you'll accept her opinion. Glad you survived that exit too. Jarno presented me with his concept for closing up a while ago, and I've tried it. It's odd, and definitely not comfortable at first, but it does provide for a clean exit. When floating, it's a little harder, IMO

At least two of them

I don't see it as a tough choice at all. The GoPro has a better imager, better lens, and cleaner image. Additionally, while it's form factor isn't ideal, it does handle some serious hammering. Saw one torn from a helmet during a very bad landing. it rolled 50 feet on asphalt and recorded every bit if it. the only thing I've noticed with the GoPro that's annoying is the gamma setup. That's easily fixed in post.

Funny, Scotty said the same thing last night. She could just about fit Skyla's suit. She's a super-tiny woman.

To the flock! Rosa Alva did her FFC today, and killed it after a less than perfect exit. She flew straight, far, smiled a lot, and had a beautiful deployment and landing. No pix to post cuz we got kinda tied up on a changed out 5 minute call. We'll just say that the nylon looks good on her and she flew it well. At 5', 95lbs, it was hard finding a suit that was tight enough. Thanks to Tony Uragallo and the Intro. Video to come shortly. From JFTC to the Bigway...Welcome, Rosa!

Darn. If you jumped at Eden North, I'd at least have a fighting chance.

+1

Guess I shoulda given my numbers... GTI-10 jumps Firebird-22 jumps Phantom-90 jumps Blade-103 jumps Mach1-388 jumps Just ordered a P2z

if you can find an old version of Vegas, you're eligible for an upgrade, and that does entitle you to purchase the upgrade and old version for whatever price you can find.

+1 If you HAVE to shoot "into the light" bring your own light for best results. Shoot manual would be another tip, figure out what the right / almost right settings would be, bring your fill flash and go up and get the shots Most important though.. have fun figuring it all out.. and don't be scared to ask questions. I think the real answer to the "ultimate" setting is.. there is none.. If you take a shot that is heavily over exposed.. it might just look like that to most of us, but if it's what you WANTED to get.. that was the "ultimate setting" for you.. Overexposed "I meant to do that!"

you'd have to ask Justin that question. On the ground, he insisted it was something I was doing and that's why no one else could come into the dock. I suspected something was up when he repeatedly emphasized that "no one dock on Spot til after I do." .

First thing to look at is any background apps. What you're describing is common, but I've never seen it this way. In other words, QT usually plays smooth while Windows Media can't cache and decode it fast enough. You might wanna try VLC player as well.