DSE

Feasible is the question. Since jump numbers are a reasonably safe way to know at least how many exits and landings someone has, it is a rough estimate of 'air awareness' as well. Sure...someone with 10,000 skydives and five wingsuit jumps isn't likely to be a good wingsuit pilot, nor is a wingsuiter with 3500 WS skydives likely ready for a four way head-down with multiple points. However, USPA and its general member BOD have indicated they don't want advanced training, ratings, resource materials at any level to 'clog' the system. Even when the members indicate they want it by way of multiple votes. Ergo, additional bureaucracy won't fit the bill, and do we really want it? Jump numbers are a very good baseline. Not perfect by any means, but neither would certificates handed out over a beer and a bonfire.

That was a swoop show, not night jumps. If it's near a full moon, we'll do night jumps. As mentioned, we just had them on 9/21

That's like saying "I agree, the sky is blue." Self-evident truth and all that... Haven't flown the Aura, but flew with one a couple days ago. It's obviously the pilot, because the one I flew with couldn't keep it up nor forward with a Venom. He weighs a little more than me, just a tad taller at 5'10", and 200lbs. However, another person had an Aura (I didn't get to jump w/him) who performed well with a V4 flying alongside.

Mac wants the camera, unfortunately. You can read straight off the card, once you copy it to a drive, too.

I have tracks from Flysights, Droids, wintec, garmin, and other pucks and devices. Having it on an arm/exposed to the sky is generally very reliable. *sometimes* sunspot activity can create problems (so can military or other interference). Paralog's PPC page even has an alert to let you know what's happening in the GPS world. http://www.paralog.net/ppc/ BASELINE (for Droid only) is another great measuring/logging tool. I'm a big fan of Flysights mounted on the back of a helmet, on a wrist, or in the wing of a wingsuit. But, they also seem to work well in a chest pocket of a wingsuit. Regardless of the type of GPS, get a ground fix before boarding. Reacquire a couple of minutes before exit. We've been turning them on at 8K. make sure the device isn't modified til after landing (to provide a complete track).

By being "around" and having the experience and knowledge to see when someone is over their head. There have been several recent fatalities where those with evaluative skills (they are long-time instructors) have spoken to the decedent in advance about their shortcomings. For whatever reason, most of us are unable to judge our own relative skill levels. The average skydiver truly believes they're "above average." How do you improve on that? Find someone possessing the skills you desire/believe you have, and have them jump with you from an evaluative perspective.

I have literally hundreds of GPS tracks of over 100 jumpers, with overlays from 23 exits at a time. In other words, it's quite possible to manage GPS's without repeaters. GPS is a tool I used to demonstrate why the multiplane wingsuit flight patterns work well here (and have worked well for 3 years).

I *thought* I was ready to start teaching WS around 300 WS jumps. Turns out I was "ready", but didn't know nearly what I thought I knew. In short, perceptions were off because of the people I was around and the environment I was in. Thousands of jumps on smaller suits such as the Phantom and Ghost, I still don't feel like I'm in "total control"/confident in all points of the much larger suits I own. So, what are you actually looking for then?

And yet you didn't take a large suit off a cliff at 2000 wingsuit jumps.

having everyone in the group exit in the same fashion eliminates a lot of problems. When you start mixing "poop", backfly, and belly, things can get weird. When you mix gainers and non-gainers, whether tailgate or not, it will usually create problems, just as Matt mentioned. If you *have* to mix gainers, non-gainers, then the gainers need to go first, as they'll be flying away from the aircraft. Be sure there is separation between the gainer group and the non-gainer group. Flatly stated, it's asking for trouble to mix the two exits types. As far as where base (leader) exits, if you have a three way, the base can exit last, or second. He can also exit first, but that generally means the other two are chasing. If all people are newbs, that means you have two people chasing a likely non-steady guy, so putting the base as second or third in the group will at least provide the opportunity to temper speed and direction. All that said, the exit order isn't relevant to tumbles. I'd suggest you get your exits solid before jumping with groups. Looking up at the aircraft is the fastest way I can suggest you stabilize your exits. Get someone to shoot your exits either from inside or outside the aircraft, post the video. Many of us can likely help.

You might get it approved, but due to a high number of track-damage from cameras flying off of cars, NASCAR currently only allows billet aluminum mounts for cameras on cars. My method for lensing a car is to use ReplayXD cams feeding Teradeck transmitters inside the car. Cameras are frame/hardpoint mounted with http://www.replayxd.com/product/pro-camera-clamp Same thing used on the indy cars (Firestone Freedom Team). Even when the cars wreck, these will not separate from the mount point no matter what. Additionally, because they're not damped, they are rock solid and don't need post stabilization.

it should make the grade for mounting, but the mount itself with the absorbers isn't worth much. People who do this all the time have come to know that damping vibration doesn't do squat, and actually enhances jellocam. A locked surface takes care of most of the problem.

Absent actually jumping with someone from the DZ first (ie; coaching jump) how does the DZ know one can perform the skills they claim to possess? Jump numbers may not be the best litmus, but they do provide a starting point.

As a student, I attended a lecture that Adams gave at Dixie College in 1978. His eye remains unique even today. Visualizing the print EXIF the old way

http://www.psfk.com/2013/09/iconic-photo-edits-photoshop.html#.UjnJKjWWTF8.facebook Not skydiving related, but worth a looksee if you're a photogeek.

This was my experience jumping a borrowed Vengeance for half a dozen jumps. Why would anyone want airlocks in the modern age of Xbraced canopies anyway? Vengeance is not a crossbrace. Just a highly elliptical airlocked 9 cell. I have about 50 jumps on various sizes. I like them, but they are not for everyone. According to the PD rep who I asked in 2004 (shortly after they were discontinued), the canopy just did not fit into PD's product line. My best guess is that it wasn't all that popular, and the added cost of airlocks and the licensing to Germain wasn't making fiscal sense. I realize the Vengeance isn't a crossbraced canopy, it's an airlocked canopy. My point was "why would someone want an airlocked canopy with crossbraced canopies available?" Since JP has a great deal more experience with both Xbraced and airlocked canopies, I'll defer to his expertise.

I'm well aware of the GoPro bar and cage mounts. We used them in this shoot. I wouldn't trust these mounts for a flight, although they were successful for us. Others have mounted just sticky mounts, and for one-offs that aren't overflying congested/residential areas, they'd be acceptable to me, but the PIC has final say. If you'd put "plastic up against aluminum any day" might be unaware that NHRA and NASCAR have banned plastic screw or stick on mounts specifically because plastic breaks in high vibration environments. The difference is that people/participants in a race expect to see mayhem, rolled cars, etc. People at a stoplight, in their living room, barbequing in their backyards have a reasonable right to expect that cameras won't come falling from the skies. A GoPro landed on the tarmac at an Air Force base recently and did some FOD. It's still under investigation. If perchance it is found to be skydiving-related, it might become difficult for skydivers in the area.

I'll do the same, but was initially trained to do this for a different reason. On a busy DZ, turning and facing the pattern to see who is landing after you prevents being surprised when someone is landing near you. So, I'll turn on landing, face the landing canopies, and stow my brakes in the field. My student rig also had velcro toggles, and a good way to get the DZO tweaked at you was to leave the hook side of the velcro exposed, thus catching/wearing lines. Either way one chooses to manage brake stowage, make it a habit/system.

This is more of a regional conversation. I travel a lot, my rig has either been in a carry bag or out of a bag. In a bag, on average it still has to be taken out of the bag. Out of the bag, it's nearly always swabbed. Once set off alarms, and we figured it was likely fertilizer from the grass at the DZ. I also carry a very thin stashbag in my carryon bag in the event a reserve is popped. An AAD sheet is included, and I also have a copy of the TSA's own manual (now outdated) on the topic. 95% of keeping things good with the TSA is the attitude, not the way it's carried or what's carried with it. Stay cool, smile, nod, be informative, it really makes all the difference. I've never once been asked for a USPA ID, but have on rare occasion shown my PRO card as a means of identifying myself as "knowledgeable."

This was my experience jumping a borrowed Vengeance for half a dozen jumps. Why would anyone want airlocks in the modern age of Xbraced canopies anyway?

Neither #3 nor #4 or accurate. There have been articles in Parachutist, here on DZ.com as well, about traveling with a rig. If your gear is deemed unsafe for any reason, it is not incumbent on the TSA to do anything to help you board your flight with the 'unsafe' baggage. If you miss your flight due to time constraints and a security check, that's your problem, not the TSA's.

AFAIK, there is only one system that has been brought forward for flight approval, and it's made of billet aluminum, not plastic/fiberglass. Legally, without an STC or other FAA approval (unless you can get an A&P to sign off the installation as a "minor alteration"), you run a bit of a risk. The fact that it's not permanently mounted doesn't change the issue of something mounted externally which can potentially affect the handling, stability, or performance of the plane. I don't know what "322" refers to, but part 21 of the FARs address this about as well as the USPA addresses cameras, canopies, and wingsuits. It does appear that an STC is required, even for a temporary mount. In the production world, have had this conversation with many, many pilots and A&P's. The general consensus is that "it's fine" until you're caught or camera drops. If you are going to mount one, I'd suggest the A&P over see it. If the camera decides to slip, will it fall off (sure 'bout that?) or will it potentially slide into a control surface? Does it inhibit any instrument? If it's tethered to the aircraft, will it bang against anything significant when it's flapping in the wind? You might further cover your butt by talking to the FSDO and asking for a field approval. http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/field_approvals/field_approv_proc/ Bear in mind that each FSDO will have their own opinions about what is or isn't approvable. It’s illegal to put a camera on the outside of the aircraft. No question. How illegal and to what end can it be done is subjective. Proceed at your own risk.

this.

The latest Mountain Lion should ingest all AVC without issue.

which OS are you using?