davelepka

Sony=good for freefall. The HC-21 may have a smaller CCD or a lsightly lower resolution image. I'm not sure. I know that the HC line has different models, and some of the differences are bigger CCD's and better image quality. Which ones are which, and what the picture from the bottom of the line (HC 21) looks like, I do not know. CCD (microchip thingy that captures the image) size and resolution are included in camera specs. Hunt them down on the net and see for yourself.

If you're successfully using a dot for video, and the still camera is aligned with the video, the dot is all you need. It doesn't matter what you use, as long as everything is pointing the same direction. That said, adding a still camera could shift your helmet on your head (depending on what model helmet your jumping). Double check your alignment once the full set up is complete.

You can listen to who ever you want. What I'm saying is this, if you are getting advice from one person to jump a 190, and advice from another, similarly qualified, person to jump a 210, your best bet is to go with the bigger canopy. Regardless of what size canopy you have, you may find yourself in a challenging situation, say a tight off-field landing. When that happens, having a bigger canopy won't ever add to your problems. Having a smaller canopy in that situation may not add to your problems either, but I cannot say that for sure. If you're going to run into a tree, the speed at which you hit the tree will be a factor in how bad it hurts. The smaller of the two canopies will be going faster. The person who thought you should be jumping a 190 cannot say for sure that it will not add to your problems at some point. Why trust him?

That shit is fucking incredible. Dude 'A' with 1000's of jumps puts himself in the hospital, and then sells the canopy to a guy 'B' who has 200 jumps. Guy 'B' is determined to jump the thing despite sound avdice to the contrary. He figures, "What could go wrong?". I couldn't make that shit up.

"Hi, I'm running late for work, but I'm Walt, and I live up in 3G. I'm always looking for a good tennis match. Feel free to knock next time you're playing." How long does that take? You could make up the time by driving one MPH faster, or jogging through eh parking lot at work. Or just be 12 seconds later. Or just yell something lame and drive off. Your choice.

You're talking about another situation in which a jumper will ask, "Would this be OK for me?". In that case, the only one who can make a judgement of any kind is someone who has personal knowledge of the jumpers experiences and skill level. Even then, there is no gurantee that the instructor will give sound advice. This jumper has already asked his instructor, and the advice appears to be less than ideal. In the end, the jumper will make his own decision, based on all available information. To that end, I provided him with my views on the deciesion, and the factors surrounding it. The choices you make are all your own, and should be arrived at through careful consideration of the data, devoid of emotion or peer pressure. My general line of thinking is that when it comes to canopy sizing, I you have doubts, go bigger. There is no penalty what so ever to jupming the larger of two canopies. There may, however, be a penalty for going with the smaller canopy.

Would it make you feel better if I started another thread with the title "Big Red's big ideas about wing loading"? No offense to your instructor, but after watching 11 landings, how does he have a sufficent amount of information to make that judgement. It's only 11 landings, all done on student jumps under the supervision of instrucotrs, who were monitoring, and making judgements on your behalf regarding weather and spotting. How will your performance record stand up over a larger cross section of jumps? How will you preform in weather conditions not suited for a student, but passable for a licensed jumper? How will you perform under the added stress of an off field landing? Can you answer the above questions with any certainty? Can your instructor? Also, you relaize that your experience on a 220 is good, but that a 190 is 15% smaller than that, and also represents leapfrog right over the 210 class of canopies. Your instructor is making an awful lot assumptions about your future performance, and the only who satnds to loose anything is you. Your instructor won't loose any sleep, his rating, any money, or suffer nay pain if you should hurt yourself under canopy. You, on the other hand will loose all of the above. Your instructor is a person, and like any other person, isn't perfect. Earning an instructional rating isn't that hard. Any jackass can do it. It doens't make them god like, and give them the ability to see into the future. Think about that. The money issue is the shiities reason ever to jump gear thats not right for you. You won't be jumping for several months up there. Post your 190 for sale on DZ.com, and spend the proceeds on a 210. Youshould be able to get a 210 Sabre for the price of your 190 Sabre. It's easy. Repeat the process in reverse in 100 jumps or so.

What do you think you'll be doing on those jumps? My guess would be carefully planning your landing, focusing on your pattern, and in general really trying hard not to fuck up. After all, there's an audience, a camera, and your future with the canopy on the line. Lets say that goes well, and you stay with the canopy. Your confidence is up, and you fell great. Do youreally think you'll apply the same level of effort and focus to every jump after that? What happens when you relax, and take the canopy for granted. Above all, why does PD reccomend 500 jumps minnimum for a Stiletto? What do they stand to gain from making this reccomendation? What is they're minnimum jump number reccomendation for the Sabre? Or the Sabre2? How about the Spectre? There is no minnimum. Some canopies are made for anyone to jump, some canopies are made for experiecned canopy pilots. There's a saying in the US, "If you're gonna be stupid, you better be tough".

Don't be sorry. Be informed, be safe, and move on. Just like I expect you to accept things for the way they are, I too am willing to do the same. You stated your position, I stated mine. It's called reality, and sometimes it's my friend, and other times not. I don't think you're a bad person, nor do I think anyone else does. I wouldn't hold any of this agaisnt you if I met you in person.

I know. I always try to present accurate and relevant information on the outset. Where it goes from there is up to the person asking the question. That's exactly what you should do. You're an intelligent adult, otherwise you wouldn't have made it trough the FJC. Cross check all information with someone who has personal knowledge of your situation or experience. I don't think you'll find any hard feelings or venomous posts toward anyone who didn't bring it upon themselves. Furthermore, when you do see the venom flow, I think you'll also see that the correct and accurate information remains present. A general comment; skydiving is fun, up to a point. When you cross that line, things get really bad, really fast. Sometimes jumpers are lured ever closer to the line because even when you're right on the line, it's all sunshie and buttercups. Once you inch over it however, it goes downhill fast, often times with no way to stop it.

Thats it. Take a day or two off from the exersice before your trip to rest up. Also during the trip, get to be early, eat well, and watch the drinking (yeah, I said it).

The USPA builds buildings. What else is there?

Look, you need an exit count, and the more pronounced you train it, the better. By the time it gets to the door, the lackluster performance of the student dmapnes out alot of the movemnt, if not all of it. Each AC has it's own exit situation. If you don't like one at your DZ, step up and change it. You're a rated instructor. Assert yourself. Then remember that all of the other student exits are being handled by a rated instructor who has the same responsibility for the students as you do. You do your job. They'll do their job.

Chew on this. You and other newbies pop up with quesitons and comments, and when you don't like the reply for someone who clearly has more information then you, you don't listen. I'll take your lead, and not listen to your gloden rule crap. How bout this, why don't you do ten whole jumps without a babysitter making sure you open a parachute, and then gift us with your wisdom? Looks like my mom was right all along, life isn't fair.

A subterminal, free packed CREW deployment is much closer to a BASE opening than a standard skydiving deployment. In that case, a vented PC might be applicable, and helpful. The F-111 PC seems to be the 'poor mans' vented PC in this case. Seeing as everyhting else hangs out of a closed CREW rig, I guess a bulky vented PC would right at home.

Do you think your the first guy to say that? Do you think you'll be the last? You're being presented with the historical facts. What the benefit to anyone here to make up something to keep you down? How about the concpet that they're posting to help keep you up? Keep you out of the same trouble that many others have gotten into with the same thinking you have. As far as attitude goes, what do you want? A fucking boyfriend? How about just look at the information for the sake of the information presented and it's own merits. You want warm and fuzzy? Take up knitting and make yourself a sweater. News flash, skydiving isn't warm and fuzzy. Everyone is your pal until you leave the plane, and then you have no pals. I'm a dick, so what. I'm also right, and in the end, thats what really matters.

My guess is that the time spent inflated and doing their job is too short for an ocilation to develop, or get very far if it does. Tandem drouges and BASE PCs are vented due to longer duration of use, and the importance of a clean deployment in BASE. Just a guess though. Let me add that a skydiving PC with vents would need to be reinforced around the venting, adding significant bulk to the PC. Otherwise I would guess they would wear in that area very quickly. Again, tandem drouges and BASE pc are reinforced in this area, but their bulk really isn't an issue.

I don't even know where to start. The real problem with shooting video isn't the entanglement issues. It's the attention issues. As in the attention the jumper has to focus on getting the shot that the cannot use to focus on a safe skydive. Having a camera will cloud your judgement in several ways: You'll alter the exit plan in order to get it on video You'll be lookling for 'the shot' instead of looking for your slot You'll be hesitant to move your head away from 'the shot' meaning your not looking for others, and you're not watching your altitude. Others will alter their plans to get in 'the shot' Others will ask you to do things you otherwise wouldn't do to get 'the shot' You can argue all day long that all you have to do is 'push a button and jump out', but that never works. After a short while of watching shitty video, the idea hatches, "If I just did this or that, the video would look better....", and so begins the quest for "the shot". Trust me it's a shitty idea, and you're wrong. Edit- Some of the best jumpers are freezing their asses off in the dead of a snowy winter.

The trick to mounting anything to a helmet is to ensure that the helmet shell is thick enough, or use a large fender washer, or even an aluminum plate on the inside of the helmet, surrounding the hole. This will distribute the force across a larger area of the helmet, and away from the edge of the hole (most likley the weakest point).

Yeah, I know a guy with 4000 jumps and no reserve rides. Obviously we've never met. But really, becasue your concern is unfoudned, and not a reason to spend $90 to hold a still cam to a helmet. I did reccomend a shim to maintain alignment, solving your problem. The only reason you need a quick release is if you're doing back to backs, where you have to add or subtract stills, and you have a running AC waiting for you. Otherwise, it's an expense you don't need (and the Op was fishing around for a cheaper still cam in another thread), as well as another piece of crap hanging off your helmet when you're not jumping stills. Additionally, it raises the camera up off the helmet, increasing the possibility for unwanted contact, and increasing the length of the lever arm that the camera puts on your neck. The only way to solve it is to sink the base of the quick release down into the helmet, a trick I haven't seen many folks pull off. The disclaimer is that this only applies to top mount (which the OP was askign about). FTP or other front mount guys are a different story. I guess I'm just old school, and go for as simple and light and home-made as possible. I'm also a big time smart ass, so please don't take offense.

Let me think, maybe that did happen once 2000 jumps ago. No wait, it didn't.

I reccomend the 1/4 inch bolt, with a lock washer (star or split, your choice). I've been jumping one for years, and it's bulletproof. I'm not sure how much they cost, or where to get one; I found mine in the maintenence hanger. Seriously, if your top mounting your still cam, you'll full access to it while it's mounted, and if you can spare 60 seconds, the 1/4 bolt is a 'quick enough' release. Glue a shim to the top of your helmet that rides along the back edge of the camera when it's properly aligned, and when you go to mount the camera, just snug it up to the shim, and tighten the bolt. Spend your $90 on something useful like hookers or booze, or maybe a tank of premium for the Vette.

Thats a tough argumant to support when the only way to get a pro card is via the CPC. It could be a feeder series for the PST. It could be an educational series for the good of swooping. It could be both, but if thats the goal, than some things are going to have to change. As an aside, the more I think about it, the issues people are having with the CPC are valid, but to be fair to the CPC, we're only through year one. We haven't even had a chance to make changes, and see how they work. If the issues are still present in year five, that would be a problem (if the CPC could even last five years in it's current form).

I think this is the key to this whole thread. If a guy has to place in the top five in his district to make it to the finlas, that means that you HAVE to attend six comeptitions (one of them in CO) and do well in all of them to get your shot at the PST. How many of the PST guys made it to six comps and placed well in all of them? I don't know the answer, but I'm pretty sure that it was maybe one or two. All of those guys had an off day, or an injury, or other commitment that kept them from having a perfect record, but thats exactly what an up and coming guy needs to do to get to the PST. This is why the '3 comps to get to the finals' rule makes sense. I don't think it will blow up the field in the finals beyond a reasonable level. Just as a guess, I'd say the average cost of attending the finals has got to be in the high side of $1500 for travel, lodging, food, entry fees, and jumps. Add in the cost of missed work, and practice jumps (both at home and at the comp) and it's a big commitment to attend the finals. I think what you'll see is a bigger field, but not the mega-comp you're predicting. What you'll get is the guys who got edged out of last years finals by thier regional placement. Remember that just missing a comp would have been enough to knock a good swooper down the ranks, and out of the finals. In an amatuer leauge, that just doesn't make sense from a standpoint of trying to grow the sport. Which leads me toward Ian's point. If the CPC is designed to introduce swoopers to competition, and lead toward the PST, you have to provide an outlet to clear the top of the field if you want to encourage new jumpers to fill out the bottom. If a guy makes the top ten at the finals, they should either shit or get off the pot. If you don't want to go pro, thats fine, continue competing for your own reasons, but there's no reason for you to clog up the system by hanging on to your top spot. By stepping aside, and taking guest status, you're making the PST more accessable to those guy who actually want to step up to the plate and take a swing.

Thats not bad. Considering that there's no money in swooping, they really do need some additional avenues to get into the PST. You're already looking at a big investment just to compete in the PST. If you take all the guys with the time and money for the PST, and then make it so they have to do a CPC season, plus make the finals, plus get top ten in the finals, you're really going to weed out alot of good competitors. I know they have a good line up now, but give it a few years, and between burn out, wives, and babies, it's going to be a pretty thin roster unless they can make it more accessable. I'm not saying lower the bar, just the number of hoops in front of the bar.