Skwrl

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4301192;page=1;mh=-1;;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Do you mean "if you don't file a return you don't vote" or that they have to no taxable income for federal purposes? What if I only get Social Security payments? (Those aren't taxed if that's all my income.) If I have all of my income from municipal bonds, that's not taxed. Depending on how my disability payments are set up, those may not be taxed either. What if I use deductions and credits to reduce my net adjusted gross income to zero? The standard deduction and personal exemptions alone can eliminate federal income tax owed. For example, a married couple filing jointly with two children can earn $27,100 and reduce their federal tax liability to zero just by applying the standard deduction of $11,900 and personal exemptions of $3,800 each. That's not even counting any credits, such as the earned income tax credit, which could further reduce the tax bill. The 46% of Americans who paid no federal income tax in 2011 includes all of those examples. Also, I pay other taxes, such as those levied on property, cigarettes, gas, liquor, payroll, Social Security, and state and local taxes... By the way, check out the 24th Amendment to the US Constitution. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Chicago politics at work in DC. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/exclusive-the-woodward-sperling-emails-revealed-88226.html OH NOES! WOODWARD GATE! This is Obama's Benghazi. Much ado about... Edited to add: It's remarkable how quickly one can throw away 40 years of credibility. (Then again, I think Dan Rather did a more spectacular job of that...) Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

A live monkey trained to use a nikon. Attachment is relevant. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

We are getting strippers for Flock & Dock? What could possibly go wrong? Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

I would totally go to that Boogie. Wait, the hugs are with the strippers, right? Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Weird that their own websites show such drastically different figures. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Oddly enough, the Secretariat division of the UN employs over 43,000 people world wide. Holy cow! Better tell Human Resources that! https://jobs.un.org/elearn/production/home.html (Or maybe I'm not following something here...) Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Given that the U.N. has, what, 15,000 employees worldwide, I'm not surprised that you can't find someone else in your office building who jumps regularly. I work at a company that employs 110,000 people worldwide. As far as I can tell, there's one other licensed skydiver who works for my company, and she's on the other side of the country. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

I've owned both. They're both great suits, but you'll get better performance off an S-bird, for sure. It's not a huge difference, but it's noticeable. One thing to think about is the "-bird" modification. For a while, Tony was retrofitting old Machs, Super Machs, etc. with replacement arm wings that have the scalloped wing shape found in the various "-bird" wings (e.g., it would turn a Super Mach into - more or less - an S-bird). I don't know if he's still doing that, but at the time it was $400 for a significant suit improvement. It's something to consider and talk to Tony about if you're serious about getting that suit. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

I hope they figure it out for you before your next cutaway!

Not sure why you would - what I was saying related only to when there is a helmet/main entanglement. I'm not so sure it's entirely that cut and dry. I use a Skyhook RSL, too, and there is a lot of debate about whether the departing main (which is pulling out the reserve) changes the angle at which the reserve comes out (as compared to how it normally comes out). In other words, the Skyhook - so the theory goes - causes the reserve to come out closer to the back of the head than it would otherwise. There are heated debates on dizzy.com (and elsewhere) as to whether that should change what people like us with a lot of tall crap on our helmets should do with our heads as a result. I don't really know where I come out on that debate - I leave it to smarter folks to figure it out. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

I agree with all of this. Like any tool, it depends on the job you're trying to use it for. The 17-40L is definitely higher quality glass (and a lot more useful as a "walking around" lens), but if you're trying to shoot, e.g., an RW formation from very close, it's useful to have the 10mm focal length in your arsenal. Having said that, I have no problem shooting tandems (I do tandems rarely) from pretty close up with the 17-40L dialed to 17. Obviously, if I want to come in really close to the tandem, I'd use the 10-20, but I generally don't get that into the face of the tandem pair. I like that I can also dial the 17-40L back to 40 for shots on the plane (and on the ground), because sometimes the photo opportunities on the ride up are great... For wingsuiting (most of what I do), I'll often leave mine at 20mm to 24mm... The widest aperture on the 10-20 is f/3.5; the widest on the 17-40L is f/4, so it isn't a huge difference, but you're not going to get serious bokeh (if that's your thing) on either lens. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Here's an example of how NOT to do it. https://vimeo.com/37998866 (Yeah, I post this video a lot...) Here's my plan. [Despite a bunch of cutaways (mostly spinning line twists from wingsuting), I've thankfully not yet had to execute on this version of my EPs, but the following is my plan.] If my main is entangled in my helmet, I am going to make exactly one attempt with my hands to untangle the line. I will not attempt to cut it. If I can't clear the attempt quickly with one attempt, I will cut the helmet away, keeping in mind that (depending on how it's entangled) the helmet might whack me in the head or might go flying off my head, who knows... If, after cutting away the helmet, the problem still exists, I will cut away the main. Now, you mention "low speed". I think you mean a situation where "the canopy is out, but it's not flying straight and level". If it is entangled, it is highly probable that at least some of the lines are being pulled shorter than you would find in normal flight. If that's the case, it's likely turning, and more likely than not in a bit of a dive. A diving canopy cuts through altitude pretty damn fast, and I will not screw around with my helmet while it does so. I will use the same approach as I described above. If I somehow have an entangled mess that is causing a slow, flat turn, I might make an additional attempt - with my hands - to remove the lines before cutting away the helmet. But realistically, that's not going to happen... I don't take the decision to cut away my helmet lightly - I've got a ton of pricey toys on it. But if I'm dead, I can't use my pricey toys any more (as far as I know), so I'd rather cut them away. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Skydiving IP lawyers represent! Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Pfffffft.... Think of the awesome video he'd get if that happened! Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Again, no. WRONG. Why do you keep saying that? It was submitted to a Clerk who put it on a docket. NO SUPREME COURT JUSTICE REVIEWED IT AND MADE A DECISION TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT. I'll break it down into a very simple process for you. You mail in a petition for cert. If the Clerk cannot eliminate it on technical grounds (e.g., it's in the wrong font, it is not printed on white paper, it's not printed on black ink, they didn't pay the filing fee), then it goes on the calendar. At a conference of the Justices (which Ms. Taitz will NOT be at - nor will any other counsel), the Supremes decide which of the 10,000 per annum cert petitions they receive each year will be heard. They typically hear about 100. Saying "ZOMG the Supremes are going to hear this" is like saying "I won the lottery because I bought a ticket." It's a necessary step, but it's not the only step. If the Supremes GRANT cert, they will hear it. Until then, you have absolutely nothing of any substance. Do you understand now? Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Did you remarry or are you married to the sea? Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

I am not sure I'd go that far. Only the utterly fucked up (and I say that as a legal term) get kicked out on procedural grounds at the level I'm talking about. I'd say "the schedule" means they received it and it was not kicked out on procedural grounds. They also can't kick out the ones that say "the Warden is a Space Alien" if they're not eliminated on procedural grounds. It basically means that the plaintiffs didn't use the wrong font, used the right margins, didn't write in crayon, etc. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Incorrect. It is on the docket (I posted a link, above) as scheduled for judicial conference. That's an in chambers conference amongst the Justices; she will not be present for it. Neither will any other attorneys. Roughly 10,000 requests for cert and similar petitions are reviewed by the Court each year; only about 100 go to oral argument and a Court opinion. I would not put money on this proceeding to an oral hearing. Procedurally, "getting on the schedule" is meaningless. So if it is meaningless to be on the schedule then the schedule is meaningless. Right? I suspect if conferences are not scheduled then cases have even less of a chance to be decided to be heard. OR since you are the expert, are cases heard that are never on any conference schedule? If so, name a few cases the SC has heard that were never on a conference schedule. OK, sorry, it's not "meaningless", but purely procedural... Think of it this way - the Court gets tons of requests for certiorari, right? They have to put almost all of them on a schedule and then decide which ones they are going to actually pay attention to... I say "almost" because the Court does have the ability to eliminate some requests for cert without hearing when it's determined (by the Clerk's office) that they fail to meet the procedural requirements. (There are tons of folks in jail who send in crazy letters to the Supreme Court requesting this and that [e.g., the "Warden is actually a Space Alien..."]; those are often dealt with that way.) Anyway, the point is that mailing something in and getting on the schedule doesn't mean that anyone has looked at the request and said "oh, ok, let's think about that!". It's merely that it was received, they couldn't kick out the request on procedural grounds, and so it goes on the schedule. There was no independent thought about it - it was purely procedural. Does that make it more clear? Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Partially correct; partially incorrect. The Justices will review her filing and determine whether to receive full cert. briefs (written legal arguments) and whether to hear oral arguments. There will be no "fact finding" in the conference. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Incorrect. It is on the docket (I posted a link, above) as scheduled for judicial conference. That's an in chambers conference amongst the Justices; she will not be present for it. Neither will any other attorneys. Roughly 10,000 requests for cert and similar petitions are reviewed by the Court each year; only about 100 go to oral argument and a Court opinion. I would not put money on this proceeding to an oral hearing. Procedurally, "getting on the schedule" is meaningless. Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

It's a good, reliable lens. The USM hasn't proven an issue for me on any Canon lens. For what it's worth, I had Error 99 problems with a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6. Will you be filming a lot of tandems or otherwise close up shots? I've since upgraded to a Canon 17-40mm f4 L lens (for shots in the air and on the plane). I found the ability to narrow the field of view to be really useful (particularly when taking shots on the plane). Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

The description in the article is completely misleading. http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12a606.htm Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Lurch tried foot extensions made of lexan. They... proved to be a bad, bad idea. Lurch, tell the story... Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork