davelepka

What do you kow about the helicopter operation? Do you have any information about their average time from recieving a call to launch? I'm pretty sure that when Lifeflight recieves a call, the piltos will review the call location, double check the weather, then make a go/no go decision. If it is a go, then they board the heli, start the engine, do a systems check, and go. If you figure on the average time for a tandem or student to go from exit to landing (5 maybe 6 min) then have the Lifeflight people call the DZ when they are inside of that time to launch. If there are no jumper in the air, then all jump ops are on hold until the helo launches. It's called a go around, and it's a good chance to give your customers another 1000ft. It's not that complicated. I'm guessing this is not a busy airport, and the helo guy are used to having the run of the place. With a little planning and cooperation, there's no reason this can't work. For gods sake look at Skydive Dallas. When I was there the AC was climbing and dropping jumpers inbetween the approach paths for paralell runways at DFW. You could see the big jets on both sides of the plane on the way up and the way down (I think the jets were around 8k at that point). They do that every day.

Keep looking for a used rig, they're out there. A $200 harness resize will really expand your options, and the turn around time is usually a few weeks. If you can out some jumps on a rental 210 and than a 190, the 190 would be a good bet, provided your canoyp skills are average or better. PD makes a 193 reserve that would be a good fit. You'll be glad you bought used when you pound the rig in a few times. Everything you'll need is pretty common sizes, and you'll be able to resell the stuff easily when you want to upgrade. Spend the extra 1k or 2k you save on jumps. At this point that should be the focus of your spending. You've got a ways to go before your gear is holding you back, and you need better stuff to help you advance.

Nice try. I'd much rather jump my own gear, by myself, with nothing attached to my hands. You strap a giant complicated rig to your back, some sort of mindless civilian to your front, and camera to your hand, and we'll see who has more fun, and gets less hurt after a few hundred jumps. You will, of course, make more money.

Thats messed up. Didn't another jumper get hit by a car near there in the last year or two? One of the Aerodyne guys maybe? You know if that guy was on-duty, and responding to the scene, he'd have the driver cuffed and in the back of the cruiser in no time.

Have you considered getting a security deposit? maybe one months rent. Provided you are responsible, keep the 725 in your account and use it only when she is short on rent to make the check clear. She'll get it back when she moves out, and all financial obligations have been met. This is pretty standard practice on a lease, and in this case, you are acting as the 'landlord' of the property. Your actual landlady is using your rent money to pay the mortgage on the house, and has a security deposit to cover that. You'd be doing the same thing, just one step further down the line. A security deposit is first security that you'll pay the rent, and then becomes security for the condiditon you leave the property in.

Yeah, Italy is close. It's more in the countries that end in "atia" or "avia". Either way, PD reccomends a min of 500 jumps for Stiletto. People who know better reccomend a WL of around 1.3 for your level of experience. Based on this, I think it's a bad idea. If you are a dedicated and determined jumper, you'll be up around 500 jumps very soon, so the wait won;t be long. If you're not that dedicated or determined, you have no business pushing your WL or the type of canopy you jump. Edit: Why not go with a Sabre2 135? I learned how to swoop on a Sabre 135 at about 1.35. I put 500 jumps on that canopy, and learned alot. My understanding of the Sabre 2 is that it's a MUCH better canopy than the original Sabre. You woul dload a 135 at 1.3, and be making a smater choice than a Stiletto 120.

That sounds dumb unless you are in eastern europe. For some reason this is about the norm in eastern europe. I think it's dumb there too, but I couldn't blame you for following the norm.

Just a note on this, or for anyone who tracks out from under the tandem to open - Watch if you have a 180 off heding on opening. Also, watch turing back towards the DZ if you were tracking away from it. Doing both will make your track useless, and present a danger in the case of a cutaway as you've just flown right back under the tandem. If you've filmed the opening, you know the tandem is not having a high speed mal. What you don't know is if they are having a low speed problem. Low speed mals are often handled with a low speed cutaway. It might be good 10 or 20 seconds after the slider comes down that the TM actually pulls the handle. On top of that, tandem reserves open very slowly (1000+ ft) from a low speed cutaway. For these reasons, you need to very aware of what the tandem is doing after you open. Some guys don't track out from under the tandems at all. The idea is if you film the opening through the slider coming down, and flip right over and dump, your canopy will fly you out from under the tandem every time. This idea has merit, and makes sense. Provided you are aware of the tandem after you open, tracking out from under them also has merit. Either way, if the slider makes it down, unitl you see the TM unstow the brakes, and do a controlablilty check (which soemtimes is just turing back toward the DZ) they need the space 1500ft below them clear.

There is no reason why the USPA hasn't created a WL limitation, aside from 'just because'. I'm of the opinion that it's a leftover from the days when this wasn't an issue. Not too long ago, canopies were bigger, and slower, and the idea of going fast wasn't really on the radar. Things have changed quite a bit since then, and I think the reason the USPA hasn't changed accordingly is maybe because it's easier not to change, and maybe because America is supposed to be the 'land of the free'. Both stupid reasons. Leaglly speaking, the BSR's are not law in the US. They are called the Basic Safety Requirements, and are required by the USPA to A) ensure that things are done to a certain standard, and that B) they have some sort of hard line to turn to in the event that an insurance claim needs to be paid, they can show that things were done the way they should have been. The BSR's do not represnt a contract with the jumping public that ensures your safety should you follow them.

Not to beat a dead horse, but trun rate does increase with WL, so in turn a reduction in Wl will offer a reduction in turn rate. That said, I'm not sure how many incidents are straight up low turns. By that I mean just incidetns where someone hauled in a toggle at a low altittude. My thinking is that a good number of them are the result of flying yourself into a situation where a low turn seems like your best option. Very few jumpers would make a low turn while on final, into the wind, in a clear area. It's usually another factor that puts them into a spot where they feel they have to make a turn. Sometimes it's to get into the wind, which is not a higher priority that landing with a level wing, but some jumpers either don't know or may have heard it, but not fully accepted it. The concept of landing into the wind is taught as being 'correct', and thats hard to re-teach. Sometimes a low turn is made to avoid an obstacle. Again, better planning earlier in the jump would have put the jumper landign in a different area, and made the low turn non-existant. What it really comes down to is better education. Giving jumpers the whole story in canopy flight. Show them the relevant factors, and how to apply them to their next jump, to every jump, and encourage them to use them. Yeah it's alot of work, but it's what you need to do to minnimize your risk. Without the knowledge and planning, you are taking a chance. What if the spot is terrible? Or if you have a cutaway, and a short reserve ride? It seems that jumpers today are ready for a routine skydive. We need to better prepare them for the unusual circumsatnces, the unforseen dangers. And, yes, part of this is giving them a canopy that is in line with their experience, and abilities. It's almost as if each jump can be looked as a mission. In order to keep the probability for success high, you need proper planning, trained personel and appropriate equipment. Anytime you forefit one of those factors, your probability for success goes down.

So you don't think that wing loading is enough of an issue to warant some sort of regulation? I agree that it's more than just WL, and in truth, if I had to choose ONE solution, I'd say increase the emphasis on training, and tie-in additional training with the licensing program. However, I don't see why we should have to choose a single course of action, when a mix of actions may provide a better result. I'm sure that imporved training would have helped several jumpers to avoid or lessen the severity of an icident. I'm equally sure that lower WL's would have the same effect on some incidents as well. Of the two groups of incidents, I'm not sure if they would all be exclusive to their method of avoidance, or if there would be incidents where both fixes would be needed to be effective. Either way, I can't see the logic to taking a pass on a step that would certainly help some people, not hurt anyone, and at least be universal in it's application. New traiing standards are all dependent on the performance of the instructor to ensure their effectiveness, while a WL limitation is a conctrete and universal concept, regardless of who informs the jumper of the limitation (of course the hole in the theory is that we have to rely on people to enforce the limitations).

Based on what? 65 jumps? How many of those jumps were you self-jumpmastering? Any jump where you had input from an instructor or coach, who was watching out for your well-being cannot be counted toward you jump numbers in reference to making a call in regards to weather. How many jumps do you have on your canopy? Subtract all of your student jumps, and other rental gear situation, and look at how many jumps you have with that canopy, the canopy you took into those conditions. What experience do you have in conditions approaching those you jumped in? Seriously, you need to realize that skydiving is not a guaranteed activity. Going to the DZ does not mean you will jump. The sooner you accept this, the longer you will last in skydiving. All the DZO was trying to do was tell you to put your money back in your pocket. That should go a long way toward how you take what he is telling you.

This extends to not getting directly over them either. What if they have a premature opening? A related note on deployment shots - We know not to be directly under them, and for awhile I was staying just off to the side, and down far enough that the trap door would swing them right next to me on opening. This was fine unitl I had a tandem pair drop a shoulder as they fell throught the trap door, and as the canopy yanked their shoulders level, it induced a spin, which had their feet swingin right past me (and ended up with line twists for the tandem). The nice thing about a deployment shot is that it's a bigger subject to film, so you can get a nice shot and fill the frame from a little further back than freefall. Always stay at least one body length away from the tandem and the trap door area on deployment.

One other thing to think about is that adding anything to your EPs makes them more complicated, and that increases your chances of screwing it up. Cutting away with a snag might ruin your day. Not cutting away at all will ruin your day. Keep in mind that you can only fight a snag for so long. The longer you spend with the snag, the less time you have left if you have trouble finding a handle, or a hard pull on either side. The first lines of defence are a clean camera helmet, good gear maintenence, clean packing (which isn't what you get when you pay someone else) and an opening plan that keeps your cameras clear of the situation. The whole thing is scary and dangerous and fucked up. Most of my jumps are with a camera or two.

OK, heres a thought. On another thread about using a helemt cutaway, the idea was that you wanted to check for a camera snag before cutting away to prevent the canopy from trying to rip your head off if you do cutaway (the canopy) with a snag present. In the event of no sang, proceed with EP's as normal. This sounds reasonable to me. Lets extend the situation to jumping a rig with an RSL. Lets say you have a mal, and your canopy is snagged on your lid. You'll want to loose the helmet before cutting away in order to keep your head on your neck. After you've cutaway (the helmet) or taken off the helmet, wouldn't an RSL be a non-issue at this point? As in the RSL is free to do it's job without restriction? It seems to me the whole premise of not using an RSL for fear of a canopy snag of the non-RSL riser, and the RSL riser releasing and firing off the reserve, is based on the concept that you will cutaway with a canopy snagged on your helmet, which may or may not remove your head from your body. I guess if you include "Check for and try to clear any snags" to your EP's before you cutaway, the RSL might be OK to jump with a camera. To me, that seems like a good addition to your EP's. Note I said 'Might' be OK. Also note that I don't jump an RSL in any way (except when I borrow a student rig to film CREW). These are just some random thoughts on the RSL situation.

If you read the last paragraph of my first post, it does state that a quality finished product is the absolute end of shooting video. If you can produce that, barring a safety issue, your methods are irrelevant. That said, a camera man has to be his own worst critic, and be realistic about his abilities, and plan his jumps accordingly.

If a guy was qualified, he would have no problems with your ad. If a guy understood what he was getting into, he would have no problems with your ad. If a guy was trying to do anything but buy a rig he shouldn't have, he would have no problems with your ad.

Think of how much more you'll know when you have ten times the experience you have now. How about when you have twenty times the experience? Don't bitch if it costs a few bucks to get some solid education into jumpers. The equipment has progressed to a point where it's become it's own animal, and needs to be treated accordingly. How about this, if you want to proceed with an education equvilant to the level in 1990, then by all means, feel free to jump the equipment from 1990. If you want to participate in skydiving in the year 2006, understand that it will take a different commitment than it did in years past. All areas of skydiving have 'sped up' alot in the last 15 years. Aircraft capacity and speed, student learning progression, freefall speeds, RW speeds, tracking speeds, canopy speeds, and the list goes on. We need to catch the training up. It's as simple as that.

Like I said, the angles are all the same. You can shoot any angle you want from your back. Staying under them the whole time has the same drawbacks as flying on level with them the whole time, it produces a boring product. There's a fine line between overflying the video, and being boring. It changes with every jump depending on the student, and the light and background conditions. I look around in the ride up, and put together an 'A' plan, and then once the drouge is out, see how things are progressing, and maybe ditch the 'A' plan for something that will 'fit' better. In the case of a student who is looking straight down, and a TM who can't/won't help out, down low on your back will get you the face shot. It's big complicated thing with variables that change all the time, even mid-jump (late sunset jumps, or above/below the could deck). The more flexibility you have, the better chance that you'll be able to keep up with the changes.

I'll back fly when ever I can. It's ten times more fun than belly, and it's easier to get a wider range of angles. It also provides a smoother transition from a head down freefly exit (before the drouge toss) to filming the drouge-fall. It's really just an issue of how good you are. A talented belly flyer can do 99% of what a talented backflyer can do. In the end all that matters is the final product. Provided you aren't creating an unsafe situation, it doesn't matter how you get the footage, as long as it looks good and the customer is happy. I think I prefer it for the fun factor. I like freeflying, so if I can get paid for it, all the better.

First off, remember that back-tracking is the same as freeflying, and your Vector II may or may not be ready for that (hint: unless a rigger has spent some time making it ready for freeflying, it's not). As far as two-ways, or solo dives, thats the way to get started. The most important thing to remember with either one is your position in the exit order, and your movement relative to jump run. Don't forget that jumpers in freefall will be right on jump run, but after they open, they can and will fly off of that line, into other airspace. I can't tell you how to handle that at your DZ. Every DZ has their own policies, and you should ask the DZO what to do. Beyond that it's a skill like any other. Practice makes perfect, start with the basics, develop those skills, than move on to more advanced concepts. Take it one step at a time. Once you can track far and fast, remember where you are, and where others are before you pull the trigger on that. If you're on a 4-way RW with some low timers, and you break off at 5k, tracking up the jump run at full speed is a bad idea. You'll cover alot of ground in 2.5k ft, and most likely fly under the group behind you.

Yeah, sure. Take a helmet like a Protec, which has some impact absorbtion, and mount a camera to it. If he gets hit from the side, or from behind, the Protec should do it's job. If he gets hit from above, the camera will take the load. If the load is anything but straight down, the camera becomes a lever, applying the force to his neck. This woul dhappen with any helmet. Just another quick point about the protection provided by any helmet. Helmets that are tested to a standard are tested by being dropped onto an anvil from different heights. The idea is that is you hit a curb or tree, to first absorb some of the force, and then spread the remaining force out to lessen the impact. All of these tests are based on hitting a static object. In skydiving, if you're invovled in a collision, the initial impact will need to be managed by the helmet, where the design of the helemt will come into play. The problem is that you are being struck by a moving object, and after the helemt takes the initial impact, it's up to your neck to manage the force of your head being pushed in a certain direction. In fact, the movement of your neck will absorb some of the initial impact, taking some of the load off of the helemt. In order to test for that type of impact, they would need to simulate a human head and neck, and then hit it wilth a moving object (maybe a baseball bat). Just remember that the impacts that helmets are tested for, and the impacts that skydivers are likey to see are too very different things. Skydiving helmets are better for skydiving than some people seem to think. Mounting cameras to any helemts will make it far less safe for impaact protection. Cameras add weight and levergae, neither of which are good for anyone.

With the toys. Be careful with the parachutes. I'm getting of one those Blade CP's too. That looks cool as hell.

Thats harsh. The only reason I keep my rig in date is to protect the pilots certificate. Do I actaully get a repack every 120 days? Maybe, maybe not, but my repack card and seal indicate that it's in date, and in the case of an incident, the pilot's certificate is safe as far as my paperwork is concerned. Sometimes it's about other people. If that makes me sound like a pussy, then so be it. What's your excuse for sounding like an asshole?

In that case, chin cup it up, make a giant reinforcing plate, and have at it. You will look like a geek. Why not mount the stills to your FFX? You can always take it off when you don;t need it, and you get to video the jumps you want stills on as well.