DSE

mount it so it's in the burble of the helmet, see if that makes any difference. FF speeds make it really hard for some systems to stay stabilized. Use a Sony AS15 for a more stable, but slightly less sharp image?

Since overwrites are not enabled, the content should still be there. Have you searched the machine vs only looking the project folder?

I chose Curvs for a number of reasons: ~Customer service is second to none; IMO they set the standard for rig service as L&B has done for electronics. ~Curv does have a great deal of field testing and several hundred in the field. I was one of the original people jumping prototypes, and watched as the container's features shifted, were eliminated, improved. It uses the same harness as the Voodoo, arguably one of the top three rigs used by pros. IMO, it is the best (albeit most current) rig available today. ~I don't care about a MARD, not really. I can understand how some people really want one, but I'm not one of them. Some of my rigs have RSL's, others don't. ~Semi-stowless bag is available from third parties; I'm using a mix of Jerry's No-Sto bag, a privately made bag, and a UPT bag. And...you might find a stowless coming from RI very soon. I'm not sure what you're suggesting with "not downsizing as easily." Routinely swapping between a 135 (rig looks terrific) to a 150 (sized for this main) to a 170 (pregnant, but not too tight), the pin system and open corners on the Curv makes it actually more amenable vs less amenable to downsizing/resizing. Add in the less wear on the closing loop, the comfort (a very, very big deal for me) and the added performance (wingsuit backflying for example, is much smoother in the Curv) make it a perfect rig for me. I've owned Jav, Mirage, and Stunts, and have jumped just about everything out there. RI's attention to customers was the final straw for me when determining a Jav vs a Voodoo, and having had experience with both companies, it's also why I choose Rigging Innovations for the wingsuit school rigs. 7 RI, one UPT, one Jav on our racks.

A static hanging load of 50lbs will likely not reveal issues that may crop up with a 150lb weight spinning (increasing tension).

I agree with that. However, that gopro mount is (a) expensive, and (b) requires drilling holes in my helmet. Really my biggest issue is (b) -- I'm not sure I like the idea of drilling holes. That said, I know the big piece comes out and leaves only the base there, so maybe something I should look into a little more Nowhere near as expensive as a hospital stay (or worse) because your lines got caught up on a helmet camera mounted on a helmet not designed for cameras, during an unstable or poorly packed deployment. To the previous poster, there is no "snag proof" from anyone. There are significantly reduced risks, but nothing is snag proofed.

We did, quite a while ago. In the Photo Forum, there is a discussion and some photos of a Fastex, and how it wouldn't release under a load. Then there was the discussion of how a snag on a GoPro mount wouldn't release with a load of over 100lbs (photos in there somewhere). I believe this system suffers from the same issue.

1080 @ 16Mbps matches source pretty closely. You can get away with 1080 @ 10Mbps, but anything slower doesn't look so hot, especially when viewed larger than 42".

yeah, it's available when you take the course. The day you can "halve my rendering/processing time" will be the day I quit the industry.

The canopy choice is not aggressive; the wingloading you're suggesting is very aggressive if your jump numbers are correct. In other words, neither canopy is appropriate for you. In terms of canopy flight, the SabreII is _less_ aggressive than the Storm. Storm is not flat in glide, and therefore it's recommended you have a lot more experience before jumping one. It's a 7 cell vs a 9 cell.

I suspect a lot of people don't know the difference, or aren't articulating it well. Baseball slides are fine in many situations.

did you get some jumps in with it?

The 720p mode will be widescreen and render to MPEG 2 faster. If it's pixelated, it suggests that the editing software isn't set to correct parameters. I'd recommend shooting 720p30 if you're still delivering to DVD or to YouTube.

.MP4 is a standard delivery that reads on any new television, Windows, or Apple OS. We're delivering 720p@6Mbps

Warranty expired long ago. You might try a new battery.

What is the final delivery resolution?

The OS precludes the application from decoding multiple streams of video simultaneously due to Apple not using the OEM decoder built into Intel chipsets. My answer is strictly related to video. IMO, having three separate machines to edit three videos simultaneously is bad business management, but to each his own. One operator processing six videos, all customized, turned in 2.5 minutes is a pretty economical and efficient use of time. If you're a small DZ that doesn't need to turn 50 videos on a slow day, then have at it. The question was about efficiency, and neither is having multiple machines cost effective nor time-efficient. If you want to use an Apple machine, go for it. My primary systems are Apple, all running BootCamp. When I need to get work done fast and on budget, I use the Win side. when I want to be light hearted, browse the web, read email, I use the Apple side. It's just a tool. Nothing more. If you want a cute tool that isn't efficient for media ingest/edit/export, then go for the cute tool. If you want to get work done, go for the ugly workhorse.

Issues are twofold; ~Apple OS and applications won't allow more than one instance of a program to be run at the same time. ~Apple refuses to pay royalties to MPEG LA, therefore realtime decoding of MPEG-based media is not possible with Apple software. It has to be converted at some point in the process. The latest OS allows for viewing but not editing the source. It's one of the reasons that people bitch a lot about most camera formats (specific-ally Sony, Canon, and Panasonic saying "they're not Mac-compatible formats" when in truth, Apple chooses to not be standardized-format compatible. The conversion merely takes a little time and horsepower. It's not a *huge* deal. Not being able to run multiple instances of the software applications however...that's a non-starter in any high turnover environment. If you want to open multiple copies of Edius, Vegas, Movie Studio, Film Factory...all doable on a PC, so it's like having 3-5 separate computers. I know nothing about manifesting software on a Mac.

For video editing, it's a foolish move in a busy DZ environment. You cannot process more than one video at a time per machine. Ergo, three tandems on a load means three machines. In the PC world, you are only limited by CPU, and on occasion, we're processing as many as 7 videos at once. Running 3 at a time is a cakewalk. And, it's fully automated.

Delete a zero there. Some are jumping tandem bundles by 25 jumps. To the OP; it's not about how fast you reach the goal, it's about the skills and knowledge you acquire along the way. Be aware as well that even after 3 years in sport, many DZ's won't hire anyone with less than 500 tandem jumps in addition to their 500 skydives (1000 jump minimum)

I have 6 of them, one in each student helmet plus one in each of my own. No, I don't turn them off. They go for approx 18 months. For the hassle and wear, I'd rather replace 12 batteries bought from eBay in cards of 12, for 25.00

We are doing a course in October at Skydive Elsinore, including stadium jump. Rick Grimm ran one down at Oceanside a few months ago, I'd expect he'll be doing one, but these are both westcoast locations.

Presumably Bluetooth range is too small. No problem for a bike rider and pillion passenger, but not much use over longer distances. The range won't work, and more than that, the winds come from different directions. Throat mics _should_ be the best answer. We also worked with chatterbox systems, they don't work any better than the system we ended up building. Additionally, be aware that what works in the tunnel doesn't always translate well to the air (and vice versa). It's a different wind direction.

Cool. You made your point that you're more bad-ass than most people, spoken your opinion on perhaps the second-most covered subject on DZ.com (which leads me to believe you're trolling). Congrats, I do believe your'e the first person to have a thread locked on their first ever DZ.com post.

I don't have uploads of people in different suits. If we uploaded all our coaching jumps, we'd be uploading all day. When I find a few free mins, perhaps I can get some comparisons up. The one thing that is very clear, is that transiting from a Tonysuit to a PF, FYB, Intrudair is harder than going the other way...is a statement that someone with little experience on various suits would make. The one comment everyone makes about the Squirrel, for example, is how balanced it is (and it is a very well balanced suit). Starting with any properly balanced, smaller suit will provide useful body knowledge/muscle memory when transiting to a larger cell, less balanced suit. Starting on the less balanced suit often teaches people to fly in near-stall position, making it *much* harder to transition to an acro suit (or fly acro at all). http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2011/04/15/3891194/MG0742.jpg Check out this body position vs http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/wingsuit-flying-2.jpg This one (neither is a great sideview example). The balance of the suit makes a big difference in how one learns to fly, and is a large component of why we frequently see reasonably experienced flyers in small suits flying circles around lesser experienced people in large soft mattresses.

So...what happens when the angle flyers go down the line of flight (thinking they're 90 to line of flight) and end up in tandem or AFF airspace? (we changed our order specifically because of this) Or, if they fly 90 to line of flight just before WS, do you have a rule for direction of flight?