jmfreefly

First off, I completely agree, features mean nothing if the unit doesn't save your life when you need it to, or the unit fires when it shouldn't. As for your post, "Who needs them all"? Well, I suppose no one needs some of the features. But, certainly, a lot of the 'features' are for ease of use -- e.g. cypress gives digital codes on failures, which is a 'feature' (indicating where the problem lies). However, Vigil doesn't make you go look it up. To me, that is an improvement. As for the 'first couple of saves or failures', that was true when Cypress first came out also. I haven't been in this sport long enough to have experienced the 'time before the cypress', but here is what the older jumpers at our dz relate to me (this could be partially inaccurate)-- From their accounts, it used to be that people WOULDN'T jump with you if you had a cypress, because of the perceived unreliability (based on older AADs from other companies). People worried about premature fires (a reasonable worry), because Cypress hadn't proven itself yet in field trials. From what I understand, the sentiment changed when Tom Piras died. Sponsored by the AAD mfg, with a Cypress in his rig, but turned off. Jumpers started thinking "If this guy died because of a freak accident, and could have been saved by a cypress-- why not give myself that chance also" Now, there is plenty of data about the reliability of the unit, and I currently jump cypresses in both my rigs, as I have yet to swap the vigil in there. But, I absolutely believe that another company can build just as reliable a unit. Granted, there is risk involved as it evolves, but from everything I have seen and read about it and the drop tests, it looks like we have that company and that product. Heck, you should want others to be the test dummies, right?

Well, my assumption is the more 'conservative' choice, which is 'don't have your jump plane do that'. This scenario is relatively rare, but, while comparing manuals with Cypress, it occured to me that this situation was probably omitted from the manual vs. not an issue with the vigil. Um.. cant recall.. that is why I was looking for your manual online (but the link is dead). I will look the passage again.

I just got my Vigil in the mail yesterday, and I looked it over. I figured I would post my first impressions of the unit. It came in a nice, durable case (a cheaper Halliburton-style case, but still nice). Very well packaged with dense foam cutouts. In the package was: The Unit/cutter/control assembly, all hooked up and ready to go A computer printed manual (Kim told me the nice manuals weren't out yet, so no biggie) A patch (so you can front that you are sponsored like Majik) An allen wrench (for battery changes) Supposedly there is a second, replacement filter, but I didnt see one. I didn't go digging under and around the foam though. The unit was assembled and ready to go. After reading through the first part of the manual, I was impressed by all the features that I had heard about. The turn on sequence is quick and very understandable. Instead of a number only LCD, it is a fully text capable LCD on the control unit. This allows the control checks/battery checks/cutter checks to be verified in words instead of numeric codes. After self test, there is a brief opportunity to enter the subsequent menu structure to change things like the mode (pro,student,tandem), the dz offset, US/Metric units switch, and to retrieve all the information about the unit (like SN, Software Version, Cutter Version, Total number of jumps, total freefall time, last freefall time and max speed..) Oh yeah, you could turn the LCD readout upside-down, if your rig has the window 'backwards' . That is a nice touch. The menus were easy to navigate.. to go to the next option, you just didnt press anything for a second or so, and it would go to the next entry that was available. The turn on/off sequences were cool, as it showed you the 1/3 2/3 3/3 button push progression (little LCD boxes, showing you what step you are on) . It uses the familiar LCD light a la cypress to prompt you. The big plus is that the sequence is very quick, and getting to the offset is significantly quicker.. and quicker to get to the SN than the cyrpess 2.. but then again.. there isnt a huge need to do that more than a few times in its life.. The unit is essentially the same size as the cypress 2 (I have cypress 1, 2, and now vigil). Everything on the unit seems well put together with good fit and finish. One feature that I had heard about, but didn't think about how they might implement it, is the upload/download of software to the unit. I just assumed the IR port was in the main unit .. but they intelligently put it in the control unit, where the red/yellow LCDs are. Smart. (of course, allowing the unit to be accessed without a repack). I love to see more information about this aspect.. The manual is pretty good, but there are a few clarifications that should be added (regarding the offset +/-). It could benefit from some diagrams I think. There are still a few outstanding questions I have about some of the vigil features (retaining offsets/mode after turnoff, comparison to cypress warnings), which I posed to Kim (at Vigil USA) here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=799688;#799688 I'll let you know what my rigger says about it when he swaps it for my existing Cypress-1. Oh yeah, last big grin factor -- they offer cutter replacements for documented saves. Nice.

Hey Kim, I just got my Vigil yesterday. You are the best, thanks for the help getting it. One Comment, regarding the altitude correction. I read the manual, and it needs some work in this section. If my landing area is 500 feet higher than my takeoff area, I am assuming I set my offset to +500 feet, right? The description needs one or two real world examples, in my opinion, with some good diagrams. SSK has some good examples, maybe write /diagram something along the same lines. Also, I had three questions for you (and I figured I would post them for benefit of all) 1) I am assuming there is the same 'warning' that SSK has issued with the Cypress, for the jump plane not to go below the takeoff altitude (e.g. an airport on the top of a hill, then fly in the valley, then go back up to altitude for a jump.. ) I believe there was an incident that related to this where a Cypress didnt fire at the right altitude (lower than needed). What is Vigil's take on this scenario? 2) I was playing with the unit yesterday - very slick and rugged. I was playing with the offsets, and I turned the unit off. When I turned it back on, it looked like it retained the offset (??). I couldn't find info on this in the manual. From what I could see, it retains ALL settings when the unit goes off (PRO,STUDENT, TANDEM), including the offset. If that is the design, I think it needs better documentation. -- especially since it is different than a cypress in terms of retaining offsets. Cypress requires re-offsetting for each jump.. does Vigil re-calibrate at the landing area and require a re-set? 3) On the list of included equipment, it said there was another filter.. I didn't see one -- is it buried under the foam somewhere? 4) Oh yeah.. another question.. in Student mode, does the Vigil need to be turned off if the student rides the plane down? (a la cypress) FYI, the manual link on the website is dead..

Obviously, it is the beautiful Bettina (bkdice), my one and only. Her bum.. it doesn't get any sexier than hers.. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=697583;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#697583

I was gonna say... no one has said .44 mag?? To quote the infamous Dirty Harry...

I was going to correct a fellow dz in an earlier post -- hartwood is closest to dc. However, they have had their share of issues of late.. I belive someone crashed their cessna not too long ago.. several folks that learned at hartwood migrated and are now at Skydive Virginia or Skydive Orange. And I will throw my 2cents in... crossing the river into dc is a bottleneck from VA, but I would take that over the more numerous knuckleheads in MD that don't know how to build roads or drive on them. Either way, traffic here sucks almost as bad as L.A. j

One thing on the digital note, there are a few advances out there in technology, that will probably make itsway into other cameras. Unfortunately, I cant remember which cameras have these qualities.. 1) Environmentally sealed units (I think the new 4/3 ('four-thirds') camera from Oly.) that have o-rings that will seal out dust better. My only worry is condensation though.. You still have the 'lens change' problem of dust getting in then, but for a lot of people it who only use one lens, it will help out a bunch. 2) There is one or two digitals out there with CCD/CMOS cleaners built in. I think the most advanced one is a 'high frequency vibration' clean mode, that basically vibrates the dust off the sensor. I seem to vaguely remember the Nikon D1H that I was using for a while having a blurb about an electro-static accessory that charges the dust particles, and the differential pulls them off the sensor. I have no idea whether touching the sensor will have any long term effect, but I guess part of me feels that if mfgs make 'no touch solutions', then they really dont want you to touch them. But, that is probably just to reduce the risk of joe shmo beating the sensor with a regular qtip. j

I believe, actually, that the chemical makeup is actually almost the same, and you can usually push one film speed (100->200, 200->400), and, to most people's eyes, there is no noticable difference. It just requires processing the film at the pushed speed, not the original speed (I have had processing places screw that up more than once). There are skydiving applications that call for 100,200,400 etc. speed film. Speed is a always going to be a tradeoff for film grain. In the 4x6 world, you wont see a whole lot of difference in film grain.. (for say 400 speed vs. 200 speed) larger prints are more noticable. For sunny days, I shoot 100 speed for tandem students, because of both cost, and because sometimes they will send me an enlargement back as a thankyou. I also shoot a F1.8 lens, so I can often deal with a slower speed film (at the tradeoff of depth of field, of course). j

Yep, I am with you newshooter12 ... I don't get it... You want the device to be an archival mechanism? DVD format is mpeg, which is compressed.. DV format is basically uncompressed.. I edit using NLE (AVID Xpress DV), and I want all that stuff to be native DV, not mpeg. I also second the opinion that the best backup storage medium is DV tape! (in terms of price, not ease of use). DVD archival just doesn't seem useful to me, and more expensive (to store video in a DV format, not an MPEG format).

I have compiled a word doc with basically the same types of things to educate newer camera fliers at our dz. I gave a 1 1/2 hour briefing over beers, and we barely scratched the surface. My main goal was to make sure we had -safe- camera fliers, not necessarily -good- camera fliers. I end up working one on one with the camera fliers that want to work at the dz. Those that just want to fly video for fun usually get some tips and gear review from me, but it usually is a little too late (like after they bought a camera model or helmet that turns out to not be quite what they wanted). I think someone at the dz taped the talk, but it is probably not very coherent (lots of interruptions, some pertinent, some just wisecracks). The doc is a little better.. and has a lot of stuff (older, mind you, but still relevant) that I pulled from various sources. j

Like Paul, I have done several fiberglass projects, some of which turned out well, others needed a second try. To date, I have made: Belly mount (a body mold, some webbing, fastex clips, and a R.A.M. Mount) two foot mounts (first had to go back to the drawing board).. again, with a R.A.M. mount, and two 2-ring releases A camera box for pc120 to mount on the belly /foot arm. Had to do some hacking in retrospect.. Tried making a nice hinged clamshell model early on, but that proved more difficult, so I scrapped that project. If anyone is interested, I can try to dig up pics.. Paul has lots of pics of his projects.. except for the flying Barn that was his first still camera box that the dog ate. ha!

Here is probably the best forum site for everything dv/editing/computer based. http://www.creativecow.net/ I find great editing ideas, and get answers to my various AVID and BORIS RED problems.

I think I have had my riser slap my head maybe twice in 1000 jumps.. and I jump all kinds of strangely open canopies.. I jump a side mount. and I jump mini risers (FWIW) Keeping your chest strap a little bit looser than you 'normally' would helps the risers stay apart. One point that I think get missed a lot is: The BEST answer is to be diligent about snag-proofing your helmet. Preventing the entanglement is always a better answer than ditching a helmet to clear the entanglement. I have had to sit down with one or two new camera fliers to help them 'rethink' the way they have their helmet setup (like with an extra two inches of ringsight pole sticking out).. after a few tweeks, some dremel work, and some gaffers tape, they are much safer setups. j

Yeah, this is a serious flaw for pc9,101,105s (for skydiving applications). Three people I know have broken the LANC port in their camera with applications that dont give enough clearance to plug it in without a bend. I helped a friend switch over to using a skylight, with a quick disconnect, since all we use the cameye for is record indication, not camera control.

I use TV 500, as I often find that 350 often has a little bit too much blur. You say you have 35x80 lens, but I cant find specs on the lens on the net.. but I assume it is like the 28-90s that are being packaged with the newer rebels. Those lenses have a minimum f stop of 4 in its widest mode. That (in some cases) isn't fast enough to shoot 1/350 in mediocre light. I ended up getting a Sigma 24mm fixed, F1.8 lens. Nice and fast. Heavy, but can take some nice pics. The other aspect, that took me a while to get used to, is to pick your shots. When closing distance on a tandem, your shots are more likely to be blurry. when circling around that sitflyer, you are more likely to get blurry shots. all it takes is stopping for a split second while you take the shot. Often, on the way up to altitude, I will set the camera on P, and point it out the window with the shutter half pressed. I look at what settings the camera chooses, and if I see a shutter speed lower than 350, I figure there will probably be some lighting issues. Like someone suggested, go read up on focal distances and their relationships to f-stops. ADDITIONALLY, the effective depth of field changes as the subject gets farther away. That may not make sense.. but look at the focus scale on the lens. You will notice the marks showing (probably) F-11.. if you make the minimum at 3 feet, the maximum is probably only at 5 or 6 feet. But, if the minimum is at 6 feet, the maximum is probably infinity. This has to do basically with the grain of the film, how small a point your eyes /camera can discern,etc. etc. Basically, with my 24mm lens, with an fstop of 7-8, I have a depth of field of only about 2-3 feet when I am focused at something about 2 1/2 to 3 feet away (my usual tandem video distance).. all it takes is being outside that range, the sun going behind a cloud,etc. for this to make the picture a bit fuzzy. The flipside is also true.. get too close, and all of a sudden their face is out of focus, but their shoelaces are crisp and clear..

Yep, I got one of these with my new wings. It was impossible for me to understand what the heck it looked like or how it worked (even when sent a pic of just the bag from SRI). I finally just emailed Jari, and he said "Yeah, it works", so I got it. After seeing the finished product, it makes sense on why I didn't understand before -- the triangle is sewn to the bridle. I have put about 50 or so jumps on the bag, and my seat of the pants feeling is that it does help somewhat.. maybe '30%' less off heading openings.. It does make packing a little wierd at first, as you have this extra material to deal with while closing. The fact that it is sewn to the PC kind of sucks.. but ah well. I guess when the PC dies, I can just pick the stitching and re-stitch. Maybe I will try to take a pic ..

Oh man, where do I start? I'll see if I can keep it to just a page! Bettina is one of the most amazing women: She is one of the most caring people I have ever met. She gives of herself (to me) without any expectation of reciprocation. She makes me want to reciprocate 'naturally', without any thought to 'having' to return the 'favor', elminating all guilt. She is a knockout -- beautiful and sexy (great ass!). She can match my sexual appetite She is free and adventurous. She never, ever has made me worry about infidelity (a haunting problem in my past relationships). She 'nags' me in a nice way, trying to keep me safe and happy and on-track. She treats me to things (dinner,toys,etc.) as much as I treat her, even though we have different incomes. She looks stunning in formalwear, and beautiful in everything else she wears (or doesn't wear ). She continually strokes my ego. She loves to skydive with me. She laughs uncontrollably at my silliness and 'gets' my jokes and teasings. She rubs my sore muscles as much as I rub hers (and she is amazing at it). She stays awake on the ride back from the DZ, just to keep me company while driving. She understands when the DZ consumes a bit too much of my time, and we don't get to hang together quite enough. She writes great things about me on dropzone.com! Here . and Here Bettina is the undisputed 'owner' of my heart j (oh yeah, she 'keeps the change') {fyi, the last pic was purely staged..}

See, this is the problem with having such a hot, sexy girlfriend.. everyone wants a shot at the title..

Exactly right. Birds, for example, have hollow bones, so much less weight to suspend on their wings. I don't know if all of you saw the Popular Science article about Bird Man and Jari, but it has a pretty insightful graphic about the size of wings needed to match that of a flying squirrel.. http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,12543,459355-3,00.html If I remember right, in the article, Jari tells of Rob 'trying to kill him' with larger and larger wings. He said it got to a point where he just didnt have the strength to resist the drag, and ended up deploying to end the skydive. There is a fine line with all this discussion.. I mean, we could build rigid structures.. and we could reinforce the landing area... maybe put wheels on.. and change the angle of the person, so that they aren't landing face first.. and we can make rudders... And then we would have a glider! or a Hanglider! Same thing with 'well, maybe make something the birdman can release, to slow down the forward speed... ' Right.. its called a parachute. If the case is 'survive a fall from an airplane', then that has been done.. I think a ...stewardess? fell from a plane, landed through trees.. and survived.. Anyway.. not to discourage this idea, but there are limits to what you can really do, before you bump into the realm of things that have already been done.

Well, it is true that for the wing to inflate, it takes very little air. But, I have to point out that it is certainly easy enough for the wings to not inflate fully or asymetrically. For example, when I first started flying, I found that the 'corners' of my wings were not inflating fully, and giving a little flap. Was the wing inflated? Yes, but, it wasn't giving the 'optimal' lift. By changing my elbows a little bit, and my forearm angle, I was able to get the wing to inflate 'fully'. Point being, there is inflated, and there is fully inflated. A second comment I would make is that 'uneven airflow' is not necessarily bad. A wing generates uneven airflow, causing lift. Can a flat board 'fly' better than a wing? (and here, we are talking glide like a glider, not fly like an airplane). Like I said, everything is a tradeoff. Wings trade drag for lift, and my opinion is that there is a similar tradeoff here. Again, no defined rules. What is 'optimal' for me may not be 'optimal' for you, because of all the things I mentioned earlier. But a great discussion. We need to find a wind tunnel and put the discussion to the test!

uh.. to get back to the original topic.. Here are some thoughts before I give my 'opinions' ----------------------------------------------------------- a) You aren't going to 'prove' any of this without a wind tunnel, as there is really no good reference -- the person flying along 'observing' has their own flight path. To make an analogy, it is pretty hard to tell who is backsliding when doing RW between just two people. So, all people can relate is observations, feelings, and sometimes (GPS and protrack/netune) data. b) The discussion was about 'optimal glide'. I take that to mean 'furthest distance covered in, say, 9 thousand feet'. Is that the definition everyone is working on? Some might cover that with high fall rate, but high forward ground speed, while someone might cover that with slower fall rate, but slower forward ground speed. c) Different people have different bodies, and therefore different weight to surface area ratios. Fact of the matter is a big, tall, spindly guy will have a much higher surface to weight ratio (for the same relative amount of physical strength). d) Surface area plays a role in both lift and drag. e) We are talking about humans with different ranges of motion, different joints, different proportions. We sometimes can't make a good references to airplanes, since airplanes don't usually have 'joints'.. f) Suits are hand made, and may not be fitted 100% perfectly. Two exact same body types ordering the same suit dimensions, may not get the same suit. Trust me, I have made several jumpsuits/pants, and they are never -exactly- the same, even from the same exact pattern. g) Because we are talking about aerodynamic forces, and we are talking newtonian physics, there is always a tradeoff for lift,drag,etc., just as there is a tradeoff for angle of attack ('float' vs. distance). ok, enough caveats ============== 1) I don't agree with -either- of the camps, straight legged is best vs. bent knees is best. The answer is.... of course.. it depends. It depends on all the factors above. I have found, that dropping the knees a bit (as Jari, Kim, and Rob T (RIP) all had suggested) gives me slower vertical speed, as the leg wing will inflate a little bit better, and it inherently changes my angle of attack somewhat. When I say 'dropping the knees', I dont mean pulling my heels back on my butt, like the Jari pictures that Scott posted. When I say dropping the knees, I actually mean 'frog legging', pushing the knees slightly out and down. This keeps the line of the suit straight when looking at it from the side. Is it the 'optimal' position? I dont know.. I would have to take two exactly the same flights with exactly the same conditions, and see which one covered the most distance. 2) angle of attack has a lot to do with all of these body positions. what works for slow flight, low forward speed, may not work well for fast flight, high forward speed. The 'relative wind' on the suits are different, and therefore the suits exhibit different inflation and different lift. (Gravity does not change though..

Here are a few pics (small compressed versions). If you want originals, I can dig up and email. of course the last one is me..

I am planning to have LASIK done this fall/winter. I researched it last year, and decided this year was the year. I priced it out, and for the surgeon I want, it is about 3500 for both eyes (second highest in area). My Insurance didnt cover it (not sure if any would..), but my company does have an FSA (Flexible Spending Account), where you can set aside pre-tax money for medical procedures/etc. Bottom line, if you do this, you can basically save 28-35% (whatever your tax bracket is). AND, you basically 'pay' for it over the course of the year (automatically withheld from paycheck). Often times you have to set it up at the end of the previous year through your company benefit office. Oh yeah.. most FSAs, you can say "I want to set aside 3500 next year", and on Jan 1, you can withdrawl the entire amount (i.e. you don't have to acrue it before you spend it). Just a suggestion on financing. I did do a lot of research, and came across the help site for botched lasik/prk/rk. Some scary stories out there, although a bunch of them are earlier in the history of procedures, but there are botched surgeries even now. The thought of having screwed up vision scares the piss out of me... In my prep for the initial consultation, I too a long hard look at how my vision is now (night vision, dryness, starburst, etc.). People have these problems before surgery, and sometimes mistake a pre-existing problem with one caused by surgery. anyway..

Hey, I know that bum! And I know that picture! [ Boy, isn't it great when your girlfriend sends you pictures like this when you are halfway around the world in Australia! She is the best. ] And yes, it is very touchable, but everyone is just going to have to take my word for it..