davelepka

He looks like he's directing traffic with a speed/red light camera mounted to his head. All he needs is a whistle, and to start dancing.

One April, Parachutist had a pic like that of Tom Sanders with some crazy, unjumpable thing on his head. This was before computers and photoshop were standard items in everyone's house, and I for one bought it hook line and sinker. Soon after, another jumper pointed out that it would be impossible, and that it was the April (fools) issue. Imagine the image quality your buddy will get, if they can pry the tape out of the wreckage and save it. Stunning, I'm sure. It brings new meaning to the concept of 'one chance to get it right'.

That's what I thought. $150 video is closer to a reality than a $200 video. I know some places that currently charge in the neighborhood of $120 or $130 for DVD and digital stills (one place adds an 8 x 10 to that). If the any of the above DZs suddenly became the only place to jump within a couple hundred miles, I could see them looking for $150. If my DZ suddenyl became the only game in town, I could see us bumping up to the $120/$130 range. As far as the TI situation, I do make more per jump than the TIs or AFF Is. Just on principal, of course I like being the highest paid jumper on the DZ, but it really apples to oranges, and never considered anyone elses pay with regards to my own. I'd like to see tandem vids that tsalnukt, JP, CSpenseFly, DaveLepka, and others feel are good/benchmark benchmark videos and worth the approx 100.00 or so that folks are paying for video jumps. *** That might be tough for me. The DZ provides and retains all DV tapes, and they do all the editing anyway. I'll check and see if I left one in my camera at the end of the season. maybe I can come up with some raw footage for you. I also have since used all my memory cards for family stuff, so there goes the stills. About 5 years ago, I lost all interest in editing, or saving any footage of any kind. I review EVERY video and EVERY still before turning them into the editor, so I can personally see what did or did not work on that jump, and file the knowledge away in my noggin. It's like my view on logging jumps. I don't do it. I jump, I learn, I jump again. I look forward, not back. It's not for everyone, but that's how I roll. Edit to add - I looked, and I got nothin. No tape in the camera (or anywhere in my house for that matter). I've attached the only still I have on my computer. It's been my wallpaper since I shot it this summer. This is the full frame image, no cropping or editing. If I can't get it right in freefall, then it's just not right period.

I think the problem with that in the states is that the jump itself is usually right around $200. I can't see people doubling the cost of their jump for video. As far as the quality goes, I don't see that as an issue in regards to sales. Most customers have no concept of what a quality video is. They generally will be very happy with what you or I might describe as a 'meduim' quality video. I'm not saying that every video guy out there shouldn't always be working to make sure their next video is in some way better than their last. They should, but I think it has little effect on the sales percentage of first time (usually one-time) jumpers. What's the exchnage rate between US and NZ these days? I'm wondering what $200 US would convert to in NZ. Also, how many DZs are there in NZ? How many in close proximity to each other? I ask because in my area we have three, all within one hour of each other, and the competition for business helps to keep the prices in check. I could imagine if there was one DZ, being the only show in town, they could easily charge more.

Yeah, that makes sense. I still maintain that proper canopy selection and packing will make it a non-issue. Also, and this comes back to what I was saying before, I guess it depends how you set up your helmet. Every time I've revamped mine, one of the goals was to gat the camera in closer to my head. In it's latest version, I cut a camera shaped hole in the side of the helmet, and mounted the camera so that it was actually touching the side of my head. The only thing betweem me and my camera is a felt 'curtain which protects the camera and keeps the wind out from inside the helemt. I guess if you wanted to hang a camera way out over your shoulder, you might have problems.

Yet. Have you ever noticed how something will come from out of nowhere, and kill a guy or two. The next thing you know, it's the hot button safety issue of the week, and evreyone is on top of it, which is a good thing. My point here is that things that we don't even see as a problem, sometimes turn out to be fatal mistakes. In this case, there are quite a few people who see certain set-ups as mistakes, but there's an awful lot resistance from the peanut gallery to admit that it might be a problem. It just seems to me that if you don't cover the big points, the ones that people see coming from a mile away, your needlessly opening yourself up to additional risk. There will always be the 'unknown' risks out there, and you's be hard pressed to prepare for them. But to solider forward unprepared for the risks we can identify if plain foolish. I'm not sure I understand this at all. The key pivot point in all this is where your head meets your neck. The distance from this point to a sidemount is far less than the distance to a top mount. I can't see how the lateral difference of a side mount can offset the vertical difference provided by a top mount. I say this based on 500 top mount jumps VS. 3500 side mount jumps. All of that aside, I firmly believe that any neck related injuries are due to canopy selection and care. I have always jumped a soft opening canopy, and always packed my own rig. These are what will save your neck, regardless of your camera helmet. Talk to Norm Kent or Joe Jennings. Both of those guys have jumped full size film cameras for movie or commercial work. Either one will tell you that choosing a canopy, rigger and packer is a HUGE part of planning a successful shoot in a professional enviorment. One slammer with a film camera can end a shoot in a split second. If other camera flyers would give the same level of care to these areas, they would have far fewer neck/back injuries.

I've swooped the 200 and 220 Navigators. I could make it work if I had to. Now put your hat on straight.

That was way better than I expected. It makes me want to buy a BASER, even though I don't BASE jump.

From looking at the pics, the still could have easily been de-snagged. Houw about flush mounting the quick release, and moving the whole thing over so it doesn't hang over the right side? Sure, you would have to remove the still to open the video box, but that's what a 'quick' release is for. An alternate idea is to mount the still to a plate, and attach the plate to the top of the helmet. This is how Wes mounts everything to the top of a CCM. As before, move the whole works over so there's no overhang on the right. Also, as before, just remove the plate to open the box. Either one of these ideas would clean that still situation up 99%. Just because you built the thing doesn't mean it's right. I'm sure you're proud of your work, but how many camera helmets have you built? In truth, I'mnot even sure that's a factor because each set-up is so different. I've been jumping the same helmet for about 8 years, and have gone through 6 or 7 configurations. Each time I finished one, I thought it was bulletproof, but by the end of the season, I came up with alternate ideas, and went back to work. I'll never forget the time I just finished version 2.0, and was jumping it in Deland. I was happy as hell with it, when Gus Wing walks over and says, 'What the hell is that? Look at all these snag points you've got here. When you're on your back at 1000ft watching your reserve come over your shoulder, you're going to wish that was cleaner. Get in the hanger, pull out your gaffers tape, and clean that thing up.' Your helemt can never be too clean. The worst thing you can do is build it, and not listen to advice about making it better.

Really? How did you ship the unit? UPS ground, you can expect 5 business days from WA to OH. So you've got 10 business days just in transit. As fas as how long the testing takes, that's not even a factor. DO you think that the people at SSK at sitting by the door, waiting for the UPS man to bring YOUR Cypres, so they can test it? Even if the testing only takes 15 min., if there are 62 units that arrived before your waiting in line to be tested, then it will be a while before yours is on the bench. This isn't rocket science. I'm not sure how your rigger could quote you two weeks door to door considering the shipping alone is two weeks.

i just thought of another thing - I buy stuff from a company in Seattle a few times per month. UPS ground shipping from Seattle to Cleveland takes 5 business days. Shipping from Spokane to Coumbus is about the same distance, so it would be two weeks to ship it there and turn around and ship it back the same day. You mean to tell me that SSK couldn't test and re-ship a Cypress in the time between the moring deliveries and the afternoon UPS pick up? That's at least 4 or 4 1/2 hours, what are they doing with all that time?????

It wasn't 4 weeks. It was two days LESS than 4 weeks. Lets keep in mind that SSK has been doing the work on Cypres in the states at least as long as I've been jumping. There's something to be said for the length of their service with Airtec, their experience with AADs, and their track record in terms of quality control.

Based on what? You didn't know any of the players invovled, TM, DZO, pilot, you simply trusted the school to provide quality staff. Why would this not extend to a camera flyer? How would you have known the dangers? They don't exactly advertise tandem/cameraman collisions when they try to sell outside video. There are many video guys out there that present zero risk to a tandem. I have about 3000 tandem videos under my belt. How many TM's have 3000+ tandem jumps? Any DZ that allows unsafe camera flyers to jump with tandems isn't a good place to be. If they are willing to cut corners in that area, what other corners are being cut?

So your rigger said about two weeks. Lets say you can + or - 3 or 4 days as a standard deviation. So now you could expect up to 18 days as a turn around. Then you send your Cypres in right around Thanksgiving. So between all the days off from Turkey day and Christmas, and including shipping across the country from Spokane to Ohio during the busiest shipping time of the year, you've got a problem with them it taking 26 days dorr-to-door? Based on an estimate that your rigger, not the company doing the work, gave you? Right at the end of the jumping season for half of the country? Durign the time when most jumpers schedule to have their rigs apart for service? These are not reasons give up on your Cypres. How long do you think it will take to get a Vigil or Argus back if you have to send it in. Where do you even send a Vigil or Argus? Where do they have an established servcie center in the states? This looks like your first expereince with SSK, file it away in your brain, and have a more realistic expectation the next time you need a check up.

I never said it was safer. I said it was better, and for me, it is. The reason being that I want to swoop, and the Velo swoops better than other canopies. My point about switching from a round to a square was that at the time squares came out, their usefulness had not been proven, but the prospect of steering and flaring appealed to jumpers, so they tried the 'new' technology. Going fast and swooping appeals to me, so I jump the new technology of a Velo. Maybe the OP will see the correlation, and then be more able to understand why people jump small canopies (which was his question in the first place).

Eventually. When they first came out squares, and other 'wings' were cutting edge, borderline experimental, and far off the standard of the day (military surplus rounds). For one thing, the Velo has a greater range of speed. I can almost as slow as larger canopies, but also have the ability to let it fly, and quickly position myself in the sky. For my purposes, this a big advantage. Additionally, the Velo performs better when the winds pick up. Finally, I can get a Velo to do 70 MPH, and swoop for 300 feet. When I make a skydive, I value the superior manuverability, forward drive into the wind, and speed/swoop capability. A Spectre at 1.2 cannot meet my needs in these areas. Your requirements for a canopy may be different than mine. I have probably written more posts to that effect than any other subject. These canopies are not for everyone. If you take the time to follow a slow and methodical course of training and downsizing over 1000+ jumps, you will reduce your risk in spending time under a small Hp wing. This thread was about the reasons TO jump a small canopy. If you want to discuss the reasons NOT to jump a small canopy, start up a new thread, and we'll talk about it over there.

Small canopies work fine, provided you operate them properly. Why did you switch from a round to a square? A round would be more reliable. Why did you drop the Thuderbolt? What made you switch to a canopy with a slider? It's the same reason people jump high performance canopies. They work better. Yes, they are more complex, and take training and experience to operate, but if used correctly, they work better. They are also worlds more fun than big canopies. Ripping a nice 450 and laying down a long swoop is a reason to skydive in itself.

I think that we can only expect things to get worse in the future. The last ten years have been the 'golden age' of Mini Dv. When it first came out, it was the top-of-the -line consumer format. Hi8 and VHS-C were still major players, and represented the bulk of the market. Anyone buying MiniDV was spending premium dollars, and expected a premiuim product. I think the case on my PC-1 was made of magnesium. That's why the PC line was around, to push the limits of the concept 'mini' DV. Small and feature packed is what the MiniDV buyer valued, and that's what Sony made. By the grace of god, that's exactly what skydivers needed. Small, high quality cameras that could survive in freefall. We got lucky. Now that Mini DV has migrated to the mainstream, the average customer values different things. A little bigger than 'as small as possible' is OK. Fewer features is no big deal, the average user would never need them anyway. And price, of course the lower the better. So the cameras around will reflect that. The flip side is the new formats. HD and other storage media are the new top-of-the-line. It's not the same as MiniDV, and what most of you are used to as SOP, might not apply to the new stuff. It was the same with MiniDV a decade ago. Things were new and different, and we found a way to make it work. Now we get to do it all over again. As far as the Cam Eye problem goes, you don't NEED a Cam Eye. Just turn it on. Make sure you have a good tape, and a good battery, and turn the thing on before you jump. It's easy.

That's not was your chest strap was meant for, and thats not an area I want another jumper groping around looking for a handhold. My solution is pretty simple, I open my mouth and say, "No, I won't be in the base". It works like a charm.

That's exactly right. Canon and Sony (for video) have had more exposure on DZ all over the world. That's the very reason I jump them, and reccomend them to everyone else. There's no better way to find out how a camera will hold up in freefall than to have a large number of people jump them, and see what (if anything) happens. Once you have tried alternate brands, only to see freefall wear your 'new' camera down in a months, you'll understand the motto 'tried and true'.

The answer to this is not to comprimise and jump a soft reserve handle, the answer is to protect your handles. Jumpsuits have grippers for a reason. Don't let people dock on your harness. Ever.

I think Jeb himself made a comment about some relation or similarity to an olympic-type ski jump. That sounds pretty rampy to me. I can see how if you flattened out the 'kick' at the botom, and attached a long, flat run=off area, you could use the ramp to go from flying to sliding, and just ride it out down the runway. What I can't see is what you do if you're a little high or low on your approach? Too high, and you'll have to dump altitude too fast, and smack the ramp with too much vertical speed. Too low, and just don't make the ramp. No rig, huh? I'm pretty sure just trying to hit the ramp is risky enough. At keast if you had a BASE rig, you could bail if you weren't lined up, and get another crack at it. No rig, and a bad approach, you're pretty much out of luck.

Stick with the mechanical advantage a hard handle can provide you, and develop a habit of protecting your handles at all times. If anyone tells you they want to take grips on your harness, just say no.

"Gear Monkey" is my new favorite aviation term. I know a guy who just got hired to a regional, and I can't wait to drop this on him while he puts in his time as FO.

Can you say 'discretionary income'? Dr. Mallya just recently bought 50% of Epic Aircraft for the low, low price of $200 million. What do you get this guy for Christmas? A space shuttle? The New England Patriots?