AndyMan

The first video camera I bought, A sony PC 120BT, I paid nearly $2500 for it. Since then, I've bought a PC1000 ($1200), HC5 ($850), and have just now bought a CX150 ($350). By far, every progression in camera not only gotten remarkably cheaper, but has also provided a serious step up in video quality. The video I get from my CX150 is simply beautiful, and far superior to anything that preceeded it. Now you're asking why we don't replace these $350 video cameras with $1200 bodies that are holding $600 lenses...? The answer seems obvious. To me - the only advantage of using the great SLR glass would be to get the depth of field you get with a great lens. I am curious about this, because I LOVE short depth of field, but I just don't see auto-focus working smoothly enough or keeping up with a moving camera flier when I'm set at F 1.2. Focusing seems like the Achilles heel of SLR video. As far as I know, the only way to use one of these SLR's in freefall is to pick a big F-stop for depth of field and focus on infinity. Doing so completely destroys whats (to me), the only advantage of using such expensive gear. At a big F stop, I just don't see a compelling reason for the more expensive gear. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Chicagoland Skydiving Center has more than 20 Vigil 2s in very active use in their Student and Tandem gear. The DZ is replacing Cypres's as they time-out with Vigils. They've worked fine, and considering the cost difference it saved enough money that a fleet of Cypres's is tough to justify. One of them fired in a rapidly descending aircraft, which we weren't thrilled about. I'd happily jump either. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The appropriateness of a very small reserve is directly related to your comfort at that wingloading. Do thousands of jumps on a highly loaded Elliptical main? A small reserve may not be a terrible idea. But classic accuracy? Maybe something bigger and slower would be a smarter choice. What mains do you usually jump? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

That's not any help at all. One very large source of medical related litigation is insurance companies seeking to recover their loss. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The ones I've seen had a stamped label in the normal position. Serial number was there. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I don't know what you'd do otherwise, so yeah - that's my plan. There have been a small number of fatalities where people have died trying to fix a simple problem. I can think of people who went in trying to fix their pilot-chute in toe, pulling on their bridle. Just like a Horseshoe, there's a simple procedure to save your life - pull your reserve. Contrary, I can't think of many fatalities where firing a reserve into a horseshoe didn't work. I know there was one in Hawaii a long time ago, but there just isn't enough of a pattern to show it's a bad choice. Horseshoe malfunctions have become very rare as container manufacturers have done a better job securing the bridle and pin protection has improved. Out of sequence deployments are very rare. If once does happen, fixing it by deploying or freeing the pilot chute is usually an easy fix. Being in the situation where you need to deploy your reserve is even more rare. Best advice? Avoid the problem by keeping your closing loops and spandex pouch in good shape. Keep your pilot chute well-stowed until pull time, and give a strong throw when the time comes. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

No. Disconnecting your RSL is not a part of any emergency procedure that I either teach, or practice myself. It certainly is not something I would want to hear people advocating in a high speed malfunction. During a first-jump-course, where the students retention ability is already being stretched, teaching something like this seems like an odd choice indeed. When I teach emergency procedures, the KISS principle is supreme. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Try twice to free the pilot chute and deal with any resulting malfunction. Maintain altitude awareness, and pull your reserve at the hard deck if necessary. __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

On anything bigger than a 4way, you are essentially guaranteed to have someone tracking up or down jumprun. The only way to ensure proper separation is exit separation. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The biggest problem I have with the "don't track up the jumprun" rule is simple. The people at whom the rule is directed (newbies), are simply terrible at being able to determine the direction of jumprun a few moments past exits. If you take a group of people who can not build a donut without rotating 720 degrees, do we really expect these people to be able to accurately recall the direction of jumprun? After chasing a grip for two full rotations? Call me skeptical. And of course, once someone gets good enough that they can accurately recall jumprun direction, it's very likely these jumpers are often on jumps where the rule doesn't apply - like larger formation. It's a silly rule that the people at whom it's targeted can't follow, and the people at whom it isn't targeted don't follow. "Don't track up the jumprun" is not the solution for deployment collisions between rw groups. Proper exit separation is. (the rule IS good for tracking groups and wingsuiters, but I don't think that's what you're talking about) _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Can you post the pictures? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Fiona was one of the good ones, a great personality, decades of wisdom, and an outstanding teacher and skydiver. I will miss her. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Some dropzones have programs where you do two working tandems, then continue with AFF with only one instructor. This program is called AFP, and it seems to work reasonably well. Generally, AFP costs run about the same cost as a full AFF program. The cost saving of a single instructor is offset by additional working tandems. It sounds like this person is or was one of these AFP instructors. There's a pretty big gap between going through a full AFP program and having 'some guy from the tunnel' throw you into AFP-style jumps without the requisite working tandems. Also, there's a pretty big gap between two real working tandems (complete with fear of eminent death), and a small amount of safe tunnel time. I don't know of any DZ's using tunnels as a substitute for freefall. Some use it as an additional training aide, but none reduce the amount of jumps or instructors, as far as I know. It's possible this guy was blowing smoke, or also possible that he was talking about a full AFP program, but the way you describe it? No, seems unlikely, and definitely a bad idea. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I'm tired of this, so I'll only say one thing. You misunderstood. I HAVE seen it, I HAVE touched it, I HAVE inspected it, and I HAVE jumped it. I do not form strong opinions easily. I do not think this fabric is ready for prime time. Of course you're free to disagree. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I understand that Airtec (or SSK in the USA) will charge you for both the 4 year AND 8 year, just out of principle. They won't want to offer anyone a reason to skip the 4 year. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I have some cervical arthritis too - it certainly hasn't ever kept me from jumping, although mine is not so severe as to cause tingling. What surprised me what was when I was diagnosed, I was doing a lot of camera jumps with a 10 pound camera helmet, and occasionally had hard openings. The doctors assured me this had absolutely nothing to do with my degeneration, and could not offer any reason why I should stop jumping. Counter intuitive! My only advice to you is to talk to your doctors. You may find some doctors are particularly biased against skydiving and reluctant to encourage you. If this is the case, I like to substitute the sport of basketball, as it too involves running, jumping, and occasionally landing less than gracefully. If your doctor says you can play basketball, skydiving is a perfectly reasonable activity. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Personally, I have no respect for someone who won't stand behind their words. If you disagree with me fine, but if you won't sign your name then I simply do not care, and don't value a word you say. Your opinion really doesn't matter - It really is that simple. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

As a rigger, I certainly would not want to register my customers gear anywhere - that would be a violation of the trust that they put in me. If they want to register their own gear, they can. I value my privacy and I imagine my customers do too. I do search stolen gear databases anytime I see gear for the first time. I do this at the same time that I search for service bulletins, and make sure I have the most current manual. I believe the existing stolen gear databases as maintained by USPA and dropzone.com are sufficient for this purposes. I know that most people who have lost their gear rarely get it back, but I suspect the reason for this is that most gear that's stolen is not taken by jumpers, but is instead taken by opportunistic criminals. As evidence to this is the number of rigs that occasionally show up in flee-markets and eBay. Also, I suspect a number of rigs are stolen by foreigners who live in countries where checking the USPA list is not common. I do not think there are many US jumpers who are regularly jumping stolen gear. __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I ask for stable flight under normal jump conditions. I am starting to think the PAC should only be used for student operations and very small RW, as it is not capable of stable flight with larger groups. Hopefully I'm wrong and the solution is pilot education. But, I expect pilot education to fix the problem after the first, second, or third event. I can count 10 stalls on jump-run in only a few years, and those are only the ones that get talked about online. This means that pilot education is failing us. I suspect the industry will decide that this plane is simply inappropriate for anything larger than a 4-way. I wish they'd hurry up and figure this out before someone gets seriously hurt. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Wow, sounds like I struck a chord! Regardless, I've seen it, jumped it, inspected it, and heard similar feedback from others. It's a fine fabric for light wingloading mains, but I have higher standards for reserves. Reserves should be dependable, and to me - this fabric is not. I don't recommend it. Maybe the new stuff will be better, so we'll see. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

You would be easier to take seriously if you filled in your profile. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Well, that may be true. As for me? I've heard enough, and wouldnt' touch the stuff. Your mileage may vary, _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Lastly, if you want to read up on what makes a 'certified parachute rigger', then that is defined in FAR 65. http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section9/Part65/tabid/253/Default.aspx _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

It seems to me that you can either try to maintain your gear according to FAA regulations, which requires an FAA rigger, or you can maintain your gear according to your location regulations, which may require 90 day repack cycle. I don't see how you can do both and also be legal at the same time - but I can't advise you foreign rules, only FAA ones. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Since I did not make this obvious, your rig does not qualify for 105.49 since it is an APPROVED (US made) rig. 105.49 applies only to UNAPPROVED FOREIGN rigs. Since your rig does not make 105.49 applicable, you must follow the rules of 105.43. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.