base689

> *cough*Bullshit*cough* > I will second J.P.'s sentiments on that topic When, even if I am a countryfellow of Marco's, I'd rather agree with you two. To claim that something is more effective than something else, to say that a type of track is more effective ("...you cover more ground...") than another type of track, it is simply a legend/feeling/superstition if not suppoorted by real evidence, by real facts (=a very nice GPS track). I do agree that in the atmonauti track, being the body more vertical, you could get a real lift, but I am afraid you are really going also very "down", so what counts here is the overall trajectory that your body does with respect to vertical (or to horizontal, if you prefer). Few years ago I did a couple of skydives (tracking) with a my GPS attached to my helmet and I downloaded track onto my computer: very "noisy" data, what could have been considered reliable was the average track, sort of 0.28 (just trying to remember/guess here...). Yes, I know I am NOT the best tracker in the world. About one year ago I did a skydive still with GPS onto my helmet, it was a tracking skydive with my smoke pantz on (I cannot say they did inflate so well, at the time...): this time as average efficiency I got something like 0.34 (or so). To make short a long story: to really be able to demonstrate that an atmonauti track is way better than a standard track, we should get two nice GPS tracks downloaded onto a computer, where first track got from a standard tracking skydive and the second got from an atmonauti tracking, compulsorily the two skydives done by the same folk, possibly by someone very proficient in doing atmonauti track. Then we could decide which is better than the other. Possibily with more than one couple of tracking jumps (standard track/atmonauti track), because GPS data (from our skydives) tend to be quite "noisy". Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

Hello Sam, I downloaded your videos. From bulletcamvspc105.wmv I noticed that (on the shooting of bullet itself) you had a (central) damp spot in the middle of the lens. That's exactly what I get when my bullet experiences a brisk change in temperature conditions (jump at our terminal wall, under nice May sun but after 1h 15' of hike in the cool shadow of trees, or while snowboarding (outside extreme low temperature). This "central damp spot" is due to the fact that we assembled ourselves our lens in "normal environment" (=our home) and not in a laboratory under either (nearly) no atmosphere or under very dry air condition. The small amount of humidity present in the air of our home environment at the moment of closing the sealing cap with glass, trapped that small amount of humidity within the space between lens and glass. Under certain (wrong!!!) conditions, there is condensation and so pops such an ugly central damp spot. It was very big and very annoying while I videod my brother while we were skiing last Xmas (I was snowboarding, he was skiing!!!). It took me 2 days to sort the central damp spot out. First day I kept for few ours my bullet open (with "screw glass holder" unscrewed), in two pieces, in the warm environment of my mountain home. Not enough: the following day I experienced once again (this time, on a lesser extent) the central damp spot. Second day, I unscrewed the glass and kept for several hours screw, glass and bullet over a (very hot) heater. Assembled again, next days I experienced nothing but just good video, without any central damp spot. My suggestion to get rid of central damp spot on bullet cameras: unscrew glass, clean lens and glas with special glass/lens product and then heat everything with a hairdryer or equivalent "heating system", keep everything under those conditions for few minutes/1 h or so, ensuring that around there is the driest air possible, and when everything is still jolly hot (careful to not destroy the toy with heat!!!), screw glass back in position. And never touch it again!!!!! Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

For Faber: > Where did you get that 10 pack from, did i miss it some where??? With Package 4 it came a power pack for 8 AA batteries, it is just a plastic holder for 8 AA batteries ending with a connector. You put into your holder 8 AA batteries (either alkaline or NiMH). If you put the NiMH ones, you get the (negative) issue of supplying bullet with 9.6 V (instead of nominal 12 V), that seems to be "not enough" (to say the least) to get a good supply for bullet camera, expecially in dark conditions. Faber, simply go in any good (big) electronics shop or electrical shop and ask for a holder for 10 AA batteries (you can show them yours and tell them you want one similar but for 10 AA instead that for 8 AA, with same connector). As 10 AA holder they will give you (nearly) exactly the same as our (in package) 8 AA battery holder, with the small difference that it is (obviously) sligthly bigger. > is it compact, i think the setup already takes loads of room 8 AA holder has got 2 rows for 4 batteries each. 10 AA holder has got 2 rows for 5 batteries each. 10 AA holder has got same thickness as 8 one, 10 AA holder has got same height as 8 one, 10 AA holder is simply 25% longer than 8 one. I don't think it is a big issue. For Ian: > I have tried the 8 x AA setup and switched to the 9V setup. Neither really work for more than 10 minutes before the blue spot noise starts to edge in... Ian, please, read what I wrote above (in another post of mine). Small 9 V batteries simply cannot give enough current to supply properly bullet camera (with 9 V battery, I experienced blue spots since the very first second, getting very "rubbish" images; yes, bullet camera (my feeling) would have drained small 9 V battery in 10 minutes, maybe less (I was measuring the voltage of "9 V" battery during use, after few seconds battery voltage went from 9.3 V to 8.8 V)). With the 8 AA setup my experience is good (several hours of use, including external mic) , eventually you could give a try to stick into your holder 8 AA alkaline batteries (so with such 8 AA batteries you get 12 V as supply voltage): if you get good images from your bullet camera, then you too can switch to buy a 10 AA battery holder and sticking into it 10 AA NiMH batteries. In this case you have the advantage of using rechargeable batteries and still having 12 V as supply voltage for bullet camera. Remember, the most powerful rechargeable AA NiMH batteries are (so far) the 2500 mAh ones. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

Hello there. I just bought a 10 AA batteries holder, I welded the right connector and I sticked 10 AA NiMH 2500 mAh batteries into such a holder. I measured the output voltage of such battery pack, and my tester gave me 13.4 V, meaning an average of 1.34 V each (actually, just charged NiMH batteries have around 1.3-1.32-1.34 V, after a while they have 1.2 V and only when they are about to die, they have something below 1.2V). So, let's say thay I powered my bullet with something more than the nominal voltage. For sure, nothing less than nominal voltage. I did a quick test with the bullet camera in my living room (daytime), after having connected my bullet to my TV. Of corse, I got (as usual) good images. I simulated the "very dark" condition simply pushing the glass of my bullet against my trousers (thigh): on TV screen I saw an image that was, yes, black and blurry, but it was "black" with not so many "blue spots". Apparently, the higher voltage (still within tolerance limits of input voltage) you supply your bullet, the less "blue spots" you get. Of course, I will try the above setup in real night/dark conditions to see what it yields and I will post results here. See you soon Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> From what you guys are saying, it sounds like the tolerance they claim is a little iffy when you get on the low side I made a small research about specifications (including power supply) of the two bullet camera manufacturers. Here is what I got. Interesting indeed. · 21CWSHRX from RF of MY (and Faber’s) bullet camera (bought 1 year ago) gives: S/N ratio: more than 50 dB min illumination: 0.1 lux at F2.0 Power Source: DC 12V (8V÷15V) Operating current: 0.130A · 21CWSHRX from RF (updated with reference to their website) gives: S/N ratio: more than 50 dB min illumination: 0.1 lux at F2.0 Power Source: DC 12V (no reference to min÷max voltage to be supplied) Operating current: 0.090A · 21CSHRX from SpyCamera4less gives: S/N ratio: more than 36 dB min illumination: 0.05 lux at F2.0 Power Source: DC 12V (10.8V÷13.2V) Operating current: 0.120A · apart from natural and obvious small differences in specs from manufacturer to manufacturer, it can be noted that while my ("old") power source was 8V÷15V (nominal being 12V), surprisingly "too large", SpyCamera4less gives as power source a range of 10.8V÷13.2V. I do not where the truth is about power source range, but if the "true" one is 10.8V÷13.2V, I guess that in my and Faber's setup (where we use 8 AA 1.2V batteries, for a total of 9.6V) we are BELOW the minum value for power sorce, this minimum being 10.8V (versus our 9.6V). While I am quite happy about videos shot with my bullet camera, it is indeed true that when in "difficulty" (either supplied by (small) 9V battery or when (parts of screen are) totally dark) our bullet camera gives out either "blue spots" or "black filled with blue spots". While these blue spots don't annoy me that much (because when everything else is lighted up, is caught quite well with good colours), it is going to be very, very interesting to see what happens when I supply my bullet camera with true 12V (being 12V the nominal voltage and well above the "minimum" of 10.8V). I have just bought a battery holder for 10 AA batteries: next time I am going to power up my bullet with 12V (connecting a battery pack with 10 batteries of 1.2V each) and I will let you know the results. See you soon. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

for Faber: > ...could you please post the name of thouse,i havnt been abel to get any higher than 2100mha yet... Faber, just go on eBay and search inserting the following string: "2500 mAh NiMH" and you will get plenty of choices. Ansmann are really good quality batteries (I have got Ansmann batteries), but there also other good brand for 2500 mAh batteries. for Sam: > ...they only give 1.2 Volt The fact that a rechargeable battery gives out only 1.2 V is damned true. > and the bulletcam seems to want at least a good 12 Volt, so I went to 10 AA sized rechargeables so I went to 10 AA sized rechargeables Damn!!!!!!! So you bought a 10 batteries holder? Are they available? I must get one!!! Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> What type of lens is on it? Are others available? I have permanently mounted a 2.9mm-130° lens; they are also available 3.6mm-92° and 4.3mm-78° lenses. > I use the bullet cam from pack 4 from RF,and i absolutely wont recomend them for high qually. I have got the same bullet camera as you, Faber, but you know I like very much the quality of the bullet camera we have. Simply speaking, you must know which the specifications of our bullet are, and we CANNOT demand more from it (nor from ANY videocamera in the world). > My cam should be able to record in 0lux but even in twighlight it get problems, in the dark envioment it cant be used at all. Here comes my above point. First, 21CWSHRX bullet camera (=package 4) min illumination is 0.1 lux (not 0, nothing works in 0 lux!). Our bullet camera is simply 70 times brighter than our PC105 (without night shot). Second (and we spoke about this on the phone), our bullet, in case of low (=nearly zero) light, shows blue spots among the "black". Well, this can easily be something that upsets you, while a PC105 would show just "black". But when something is honestly "seeable" (let's say, when light is around 1 lux), our bullet shows good pictures, while PC105 gives just the contours of images (the inner part of contours just being black). > i think they might will be good in the skyenvioment were you have loads of light but BASE jumping were the ground often looks dark compared to the sky,i dont like it. Faber, sorry, I think you have WAY HUGE expectations from (any) bullet camera. NO CAMERA CAN SHOOT IN DARKNESS (unlkess you go on infrared, with internal/external illuminator). I can guarantee you that I took a video (just as soon as I set my system up) of a jump from our A, total darkness, yes, my mate is a black contour, but as soon as I lighted up the (small) speleo light I have on my helmet, I got very bright images on those "objects" that were in the light cone of my light (my arms in red jacket, the iron beam, my canopy above my head, the grass approaching for landing, my camo stash bag, whatever else felt into the light cone of my light). Yes, outside the cone light everything is black with blue spots, but even with a "direct" PC105 with super night shot (=with infrared illuminator on), what you can get is that everything (that is within the cone illumination of infrared) in green and black and everything is outside (the cone illumination of infrared) is simply black. I do have 2 videos of a S jump, shot at the same time, around sunset, the first through my bullet, the second of my exact jump, but shot by a PC105 from the landing. It was possibly just after sunset, the video shot from my bullet shows nice seable colours, the video shot from PC105 just gives contours with dark "inner". > One of the reasons is might that a Bullet cam is analoug into digi. i dunno about this. With a 2 m length cable, the story of analog input is simply a "non issue". > how much power do you use(which batteryes) i use 8 AA(or AAA??)2100mah which fits in the batterypack.its the strongest batteryes i could find. Now I tell you about my experience with batteries. Firstly, the manufacturer says that you could use bullet camera either with 8 AA batteries for 12 h (or so) or with 9 V (small) battery for 1 h (or so). The story of supplying the bullet canera with the 9 V (small) battery is simply FAKE - FALSE - VOID - BULLSH|T. I used both a rechargeable NiMH 9 V battery and a standard alkaline 9 V battery. Results: imagea were bad and all the screen was full with blue spots. My opinion: bullet camera is simply quite eager of current for its normal operation, which current for its normal working simply CANNOT be supplied by a 9 V battery. So, after the unlucky test with 9 V battery, at first I used in the battery package 8 AA NiMH 2300 mAh batteries, but now I bought 8 AA NiMH 2500 mAh (2500 mAh are the most powerful AA batteries so far). The 8AA batteries can supply enough current for the (normal) use of bullet camera (which bullet camera absorbs 1.3W of power, not exactly "nothing", it gets jolly warm after few minutes it is ON). Edited to add: current absorbed by bullet camera is 130 mA (=0.13 A), that is NOT exactly nothing. In fact, supposing of having 8 AA batteries having a voltage of 1.25 V each, we end up with supplying 0.13 A at 10 V, which in fact gives an absorption of 1.3 W (= a small heater!!!). Note: along the usage of my bullet camera, I always use also the external microphone (which drains a little bit current on its own). Using 2500 mAh batteries gives me a very nice working usage and time for my bullet camera, no blue spots (unless it is jolly fu(king dark...). In the end: I am very happy with my setup, even if it takes 30 minutes (or so) to assemble everything up. I used my bullet to take a video of an urban jumps of mine, night time but there were street lamps everywhere, and they were enough to give a good illumination to my video, I am really happy about it. Furthermore, I used my bullet camera (with a headband) for videoing my snowboard adventures (well, actually, I video my brother skiing!!!), with very, very good results (possibly, a 2.9mm-130° lens is a bit too wide for this sort of videos, but never mind!). Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> · a mini cam that is a few times lighter and smaller than the standard skydiving mountings... Please, have a look at the reply I posted on the thread "Bullet Cam..where to buy". I am really hapy with my bullet camera, very high definition indeed, but I would stick, as videorecorder, to a Sony videocamera (instead of going towards un unlikely digital video recorder...). Just my 0.02€ Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

Hello Reginald, at the end of 2003 I bought Camera Package #4 (bullet camera type 21CWSHRX) as per web site posted by you. Outstanding bullet camera. Bullet camera 21CWSHRX has got 480 TV lines, 470 kpix and a min illumination of 0.1 lux at 2.0, that is about 70 times (!!!!) brighter than my PC105E (without night shot, being min illumination of PC105E 7 lux). Firstly, I immediately mounted the 2.9mm-130° lens (=wide angle) and never changed it. I manufactured from fiberglass and two components resin a cradle (quite a job to manufacture it with built-in alignment!!!), when I mount my bullet camera on my FD helmet, I simply put cradle onto helmet, bullet camera into cradle and I stick everything in position few a suitable number of stripes of gray duct tape. I state in advance that I have used my bullet camera only for BASE jumping, and every time I assemble all my setup (bullet + videocamera), it takes me an overall of at least 30 min of work, but I like very much my setup. I keep my PC105E in a fanny pack I hold on my belly (below chest strap) with its proper strap that goes around my neck (holding the vertical force at opening time), while there are my clothes (wind jacket or so) that keep the fanny pack with videocamera in position. Because of how sockets are made in my PC105E (they let jacks coming out of camera body at 90° angle), I had to manufacture, out of thick/heavy foam plastic "stuff", another "creadle" that allow pressure to be exerted onto videocamera with all jacks "protruding" at 90°. There is the jack of AV cable that connects with bullet camera and ext microphone and there is also the jack of LANC controller (mandatory piece of equipment, buy it with the package, for sure!!!). Then I fix such a plastic "cradle" in position with inside the two jacks with (narrow and thin) gray duct tape. Long preparatory work, yes, but finally I end up with 150 g (between bullet camera and cradle) on my helmet (I have cradle+bullet mounted half way between side and top mounting, let's say, 45°, because on top of my helmet I have a "permanently" mounted speleo light for my night BASE jumps, but anyone who skydives only with his/her bullet camera, can mount it on top of helmet). Very light indeed (you cannot notice you have anything onto your helmet) and practically impossible to snag anything onto your setup. I use again duct tape to route bullet camera cable from its position on helmet down into my clothes. My procedure for assembling is the following. After having prepared at home everything with duct tape, I don the rig with chest strap undone, I pass around my neck the strap of fanny pack with videocamera inside, then I wear the helmet, I make all the electrical (power pack of bullet and mic) and video connections, I close my (tight) fanny pack, I close my wind jacket, I leave hanging out the LANC controller, I fasten the chest strap, I finish to close properly EVERY strap/whatever, still with LANC controller hanging onto my chest/belly, with a click I record a little bit and then I stop. When it's time to do some action, I am practically ready to jump, I press the pause button (so it goes back to record), I stick the LANC controller into the neck of my wind jacket and I am ready to jump. Important note: in order to avoid unwanted pressure of LANC controller buttons when moving within your jacket, I manufactured (again from hard foam plastic) a frame that surrounds all the 4 buttons of LANC controller and sticks out 5 mm, so buttons are inside this "bowl", and unwanted pressure onto a butotn it's very unlikely to happen. Hope this helps. I have also few photos of my setup, just go to the bottom of my webpage http://www.geocities.com/base_689/index.html Just my 0.02€ Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

>You say a Frenchman Years Ago..... At 29 meters. > ... > When today's Vented, technology canopy could not do it ??? Ray, today's vented canopy can do it, and tyey can do it very well indeed. There is this fantastic (and very humble) European BASE jumper that jumped in DB a cliff in Europe that is 26.80 m high. Yes, he landed on hard wet sand (it is a overhanging cliff by the sea) but the landing, even if he stumbled, was NOT dramatic, with suitable protections, it could have been done also on a hard surface. 3 seconds of flight, a good flare with risers and here he is. This jumper is as good as modest. On the web is also possible to find the video, I cannot find it presently (I had it on my HD, but I had to delete it for space reasons). Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

Not me this time. But in a couple weeks time myself, #726 and another hardcore BASE jumper are going to do something naughty. Videos will follow and will be shown only to selected people. Ciao Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> We're going to spend 2 weeks there in early February... How the heck are you doing, Bryan? Hope you are going to drop me an e-mail some time before your arrival here, mate!!! Take care!!! Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> ...at this chimney the steps felt off aprox 5m up on this metal chimney. Any idea how to get up there whith out too much noice? I recently bought on eBay (for about 35€ shipment included, just go to eBay and search for "crossbow" available in Europe ) a very nice crossbow pistol, 80 lb - 36 kg force. Yet to get it in proper use, but I already modified as follows. I drilled a hole in the tail of the arrow, passed a thin rope through such a hole. The idea is to shoot the arrow with its thin rope trailing behind and get it pass through some part of the metallic structure. Once you collect the arrow (after having tied a thick climbing rope at the fixed end of the thin rope), you start pulling the thin rope until you get the thick climbing rope to pass trough the structure. Once there, you fix both ends of thick climbing rope onto a safe place (beware of your knots!!!!). Then, with climbing harness, gri-gri, jumar (with rope "pedal"), up you go. I know, I know, it sounds too many technical stuff involved, but I am NOT the fittest climber in the world, furthermore I have got an age, so I use technology to take me where my fitter than me mates can go WITHOUT (much) technical aids!!! If the gap to pass the thick climbing rope is not that far up above ground, you could attempt to launch the thick climbing rope itself through the structure, it varies from case to case. Just my 0.02€ Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> what is the status of the nice 300m cliff near the terminal wall... > recently i had problem w the police there. they said: '' not jump the cliff, go away!! '' Very appropriate question. And here comes in force the story of "NOT illegal". It is not a right to jump that subterminal wall. It is simply NOT illegal. So locals (people, authorities, windsurfers, whatever) TOLERATE that we jump off that wall. Just because it is simply not illegal and there is NO RIGHT to jump off there, local police (whenever they feel like doing so) can say that jumping off that wall you can endanger local population/campers underneath in case of a total. That, honestly, is partially true. We regularly jump that wall. We never had personally problems with local police. But we are very quite and as low profile as possible when we jump there. The "toleration" thing becomes very, very evident any time large groups show up and are both numerous and noisy. I do not know which the conditions of your group were when you had that "discussion" with local police. But, granted that we are tolerated and there is no right to jump that wall, local police, if they simply do not like you, can show up with something "You cannot jump off there", "you endanger those campers underneath" or any other "pleasantry" possible. The one that happened to you is a perfect case of what "NOT illegal" means. There is ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to which you can grab onto to say: "It is my right to jump". Full stop. We are simply "tolerated". In a lot of southern Europe countries an activity that goes on without being "disturbed" does not mean necessarily that is legal, most of times they simply don't bother to stop you and you go on "undisturbed" until something happens, and after that "something" has happened, then they all in once discover that you shouldn't do that and they EXPLICITELY say to you that YOU CANNOT DO THAT. There is a misunderstanding about interpretation and application and enforcing laws between anglosaxon and latin cultures. In anglosaxon countries, authorities do not tolerate at all that you do something that you shouldn't, and they stop you immediately and keep on stopping you whenever you try to do again that thing. In latin countris, authorities are more easy in tolerating and applying and enforcing laws, if you do something that you shouldn't but you don't cause any harm to anyone, they can let you keep on doing that. Anglosaxon: I do "this" and I cannot do "that": so "this" is legal and "that" is illegal. Latin: I do "this" and I cannot do "that": so "this" is something that I can do (perhaps "this" is not perfectly legal but without doing so much noise, I can keep on doing it) and "that" is something that I cannot do by any means (bloody hell, "that" must be something so damn illegal!!!!). It is not like driving a car or like piloting an aircraft: laws are in force to say which car can circulate and who, holding which licence, can drive that car, laws are in force to say which aircraft holding which test/maintenance can fly and who, holding a pilot licence, can pilot that aircraft. In such cases you can say: "It is my right to drive this car, because I have got my driving licence and my car is perfectly maintained (see certificates...)", "It is my right to pilot this aircraft, because I have got my piloting licence and my aircraft is perfectly maintained (see certificates...)". In BASE jump, you cannot mention any right or any law, simply because there aren't. So, the very general rule is (anywhere in general when jumping off "NOT illegal" sites): try to be as smooth as possible, try to be as low profile as possible, try to land as far as possible off the people/vans/campers/whatever, try to be as silent as possible. Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

I think there a big misunderstanding when an American BASE jumper talks about "legal" BASE site. Most of times what the American chap calls "legal" is simply "NOT illegal". In Europe there are simply NO laws ruling BASE (with one exception, see afterwards) so BASE is simply NOT illegal and so you can jump off cliffs, provided that you exit from public land and you land on public land. So, 99% of times when an American talks about "legal" BASE in Europe simply he/she refers to a "NOT illegal" activity, or, in the end, to something that is "TOLERATED". It is NOT a right for anybody to BASE jump off mountains but simply, provided that you do not break any law, they let you do it. Exception: our terminal wall, after a fatality, has brought to local authorities that BASE jump "exists": after a 6 month period of (formal) banning, local authorities decided that is legal to BASE jump off our terminal wall, provided that you (try to) stick to "RECOMMENDATIONS" that have been issued and available to be read at the bar at the landing. Any other European mountain, I guess, is simply NOT illegal to jump off. Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

It is several years that I have been using happily my Yardage Pro 800 Compact Bushnell, it is reliable, it is backlit, jolly small to keep it in your pocket. Moreover, being quite a mature product, you can find it on the web at about 280$. My advice: for about 290$, you can also find another mature still reliable rangefinder, Yardage Pro 1000, it is slightly bigger in size but perhaps worth for its longer theoretical range. It is always nice (for few bucks more) to have the longest range possible/available, because let's remember that the 800 yd - 732 m and 1000 yd - 914 m ranges are THEORETICAL ranges. ACTUAL ranges are way below the theoretical ones, from half the theoretical one down to one third to way less than one third, depending on characteristics and nature of target. If your are NOT shooting to a perfectly flat and perpendicular wall but instead you are shooting to foliage, trees, metallic frames, very small borders of thiny metallic frames, small thin particulars of civil buildings and whatever else is around out there, you know very well what the actual operative range of a laser rangefinder is. For Mac: the Swedish rangefinder is fu(king amazing, you can measure objects's height from your home, its range is about 10 km (!!!!!) but I am afraid its affordability is only for few blokes, it costs aboput 10.000$ or so, moreover, it is jolly fu(king dangerous for your eyes. Yes, the Swedish company produces also the model that with 2 measures (1 diagonal and 1 horizontal distance) calculates directly the height (having a built in inclinometer), but I remember that also this model is jolly more expensive than the Bushnell family of rangefinder. To make short a long story: it is better to spend few bucks, do few measurements more and use Phytagora instead of having everything automatically calculated but having to pay WAY MORE money!!!!!!! Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> Tree (others place your name here if it applies)... ...you're far from representitive the BASE comunity JP, I often read you very interesting posts about parachutes, skydiving, whatever. You write down very nice and instructive things. Here, I am fraid, you are completely out of context. Yes, Tree is not THE representative of the BASE community. But, I am afraid, Tree expresses his very personal thought that, by chance, results to be the same thought as 95% of active BASE jumpers (Felix belongs to the othere 5% ), all over the world. As Tree said, and without causing you, JP, offence: 1) if you are not a BASE jumper 2) and/or if you do not BASE jump at Perrine any personal opinion of yours is out of place. If you do not know the sport of BASE jumping (and only an active BASE jumper can know, and I am not talking about someone that has hucked himself a couple of times off an object, maybe a span), you cannot argue about what is right for BASE and for Perrine and what is dangerous (=could lead to have the S shut down) for BASE and for Perrine. The fact that BASE is not regulated by law does NOT mean that Mr. Bill one morning wakes up and decides to throw high school kids off a bridge. Skydiving has got rules and these rules can be quite easily enforced. In fact, you can only skydive off an airplane taht has taken off at a drop zone, so, if Mr. Bill hasn't got a regular licence (evidence of proper training), without donning a TSO'ed rig, without an "in-date" packed reserve and without a proper insurance, you simply do not allow Mr. Bill to step onto aircraft. It's quite simple. And this is also the reason why skydiving is quite a safe sport and why they succeed in keeping a very low fatality rate in the sport of skydiving worldwide. BASE jump happens to be only ten 10 times more dangerous than skydiving and: 1) BASE hasn't got rules 2) even if BASE had got rules and licenses and whatever, I see it very, very unlikely to succeed in enforcing such rules (if there is not pilot onto aircraft, it's very unlikely that aircraft takes off by itself; an object, I am afraid, is "there" all alone, impossible to think to police any jumpable object in the world). So, the fact that it is NOT forbidden by law, it NOT a good idea to throw Mr. Bill off a bridge. Can Mr. Tanman throw Mr. Bill's off the Perrine? Yes, he can. Is a good idea that Mr. Tanman throws Mr. Bill's off the Perrine? No, it's not. Which are the chances that if a Mr. Bill (thrown off the Perrrine by Mr. Tanman) goes in, they shut the Perrine up? There are very high chances. As I wrote in anther post, a "public" object is helpless, without defence, it is there, anybody can hurl himself off of it. In the end, it is all about statistics/probability/chances, as life, in the end, is. It is NOT what you can do or what you cannot do. It is about reducing the chances of fatalities in a certain activity trying to enforce some rules/laws/prescriptions/warnings in order that the accidents in such activity are minimized. If properly trained BASE jumpers with proper gear and proper weather jump off the Perrine, the happening of a fatality is very, very low. If Mr. Bill is thrown off the Perrine by Mr. Tanman with old gear, maintained who-knows-how and who-knows-how-often, in the long run, which do you think the probability of a fatality will be? Write here your answer........................ In the end, when about BASE jump, it is NOT about laws and/or writen rules, it is all about good and old common sense. Any real BASE jumper (and here for "real" I do not mean Superman, I mean an active and well trained and well experienced BASE jumper who know how difficult is to have a number of jumpable objects available... ...without jumpable objects you simply cannot do the sport) would say EXACTLY the same things Tree wrote. What would you think, JP, if I showed up at YOUR own DZ without a licence, with questionable rig on my shoulders, reserve not sealed, without an insurance and I said to you: "Let me step up into the plane, let me step up into the plane, I want to skydive!!!!" What would you do me? I tell you what you would do me. You would stamp a huge footprint on my buttocks, that's what you would do!!!!! And you would be completely right!!!!!!! So, JP, if you are NOT into the sport of BASE, you cannot understand what Perrine is for an American BASE jumper, a safe place where you can learn, a safe place where you can enjopy doing your favourite sport, so you cannot imagine what a shut down of Perrine wuold be for the "average" american BASE jumper. I live quite far away, I live in Italy, here we have quite few legal object (by legal I mean that they are NOT illegal, but that would be a longer discussion...) and quite a few "do-it-at-night" objects, so, personally I am not directly involved on a shut up of the Perrine. But it comes that firstly it happens that I made my first four BASE jumps off the Perrine, and so I am sentimentally involved with the bridge, and secondly, I would feel very sorry and very sad for my American friends if all of a sudden the authorities go and shut the Perrine down. Just my 0.02€. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> why is it that you dont use a standard 9ft bridle? Because the load that breaks the break cord loop (100 lb - 45 kg) is applied very brutally/immediately/sharply to the bridle and its seams; I am scared that in the long run the continuous application of abrupt/immediate forces to a standard bridle in SL jumps could damage someway somehow its seams and this could bring one day to deteriorate rapidly your day of jumping (perhaps on a terminal jump or so...). So I caught the hint from a bloke on the BB (it should have been a US bloke, indeed) that used a 5.5mm dyneema climbing rope as a "special bridle" for all his SL jumps. IMHO, I think that using a WAY OVERSIZED/OVERDIMENSIONED "special bridle", both in its breaking load (1800 kg - 3968 lb) and its seams (mine has got seams for closing the loops with SO MANY stitches....), takes completely away my gear fear. > Do you only use that "bridle"on SL jumps, and why? Yes, I use my 5.5mm dyneema "special bridle" ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY for SL jumps. Could I use it also in normal freefall jumps? I thinks I could, yes, anyway, it's way bulkier and heavier than a standard bridle, and, furthermore, for handholding the "special bridle" + PC, instead of "S folding" it, I should "figure 8 folding" it, filling way more my hand than what would fill an S folded standard bridle + PC. On a SL jump, my heavier (perhaps 50 ÷ 100 gr or so heavier than standard bridle, I never weighed it...) "special bridle" is brought to stretch by my weight, so its greater weight is NOT AT ALL a concern, once I break the break cord loop, my parachute is already stretched all the way up and needs only to expand, at that point the weight you have above upper surface of parachute does not matter any more (provided you DO NOT have a 2 kg weight on top of it... ). Viceversa, freefalling my "special bridle" from handheld setup, expecially off an aggressively low object, would cause me few concerns about its weight that at low altitudes/low airspedd/low available height is a negative issue, having the PC to pull up the pin, the parachute PLUS the additional weight of "special bridle". Plus, handhelding my special bridle, I would end up having in my hand something very bulky/massive. So, for ANY freefall jump of mine, why not use the 9' - 2.74m standard bridle, which is thin and flat and in use for decades? Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

*stands up clapping* · · · · · · · · Me too!!!!! Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> can someone post a pic of the device? A nice picture is the one linked by Faber, where you can see the "carry-with-you" alone. Look also at the sl-carry-knot1.jpg picture posted above by sum1sneaky where you can see the "carry-with-you" already rigged up and ready to jump. Have a look also to my personal setup here as follows, where you can see the overall picture and the detail also. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> ...consider that the application of force on the breakcord is not a static load... ...your all up weight is accelerating away from S/L at the moment that weight is applied to the breakcord... > ...but this increases the forces applied considerably Well, let's see. Our body in freefall WOULD exert a high force. Why "WOULD"? Simply because before break there no force applied anywhere (= not to a fixed point), gravity force is pulling you down and you accelerate, after break again gravity continues to pull you down. Your body does exert a force ON A STATIC/FIXED POINT only in the few split milliseconds you load the break cord and it breaks. Before putting tension on break cord and after break, there only gravity with no other force that opposes to it, simply it accelerates you. The bottom line is the above: even if your accelerating body would be capable of exerting a high force onto a fixed ppoint, the break cord cannot hold yourself more than its proper break load. Rather, I think an interesting argument is the following. Granted that 100 lb - 45 lb applied statically to break cord loop breaks it, what would happen to our break cord loop if a device capable of applying a variable force (=your body in freefall) actually start exerting an increasing force onto the break cord loop? When would the break cord loop break if such a variable force is applied dynamically/instantaneously to it? Would the break cord loop dynamically break BELOW 100 lb - 45 lb? Would the break cord loop dynamically break ABOVE 100 lb - 45 lb? I think the dynamic test can only be performed in a laboratory, putting break cord strings between the clamps of a dynamometer and setting it to pull at a fixed speed (perhaps few test at different speeds) and having it to record the load applied between the clamps, up to break of loop. And having a look at the results, especially reading the load AT break. If you take a 100 lb - 45 lb and apply it gradually to a break cord loop, at the very end of releasing it breaks the break cord loop. Given for granted that if you step "very fast" over a brick on the pavement, you exert onto brick twice your weight (=dynamic load) just for a split millisecond and then you exert just your weight, if you step "very slowly" over a brick, at the end of slowly process of releasing/loading weight you end up with your weight onto brick. So, if you take a 100 lb - 45 lb load and release it istantaneously onto a break cord loop, it WOULD exert for a split millisecond twice its weight, but simply our break cord loop cannot hold such a weight and it breaks exactly AT its (dynamic) break load. It would be really interesting to know if and how much the dynamic break load differs from the static break load of our 80 lb - 36 kg break cord. If you don't believe to the fact that instantaneously applying a weight onto a surface, the surface itself bear for a split millisecond bear a load twice the weight of the object, try the following. Take the scale you got at home. First test: put only one foot onto the scale and very slowly transfer your weight from the foot on pavement to the foot onto the scale: you will notice that the indicator on the scale increases up to your weight, without never exceeding your own weight. Second test: put only one foot onto the scale and transfer IMMEDIATELY, as fast as you can, your weight from the foot on pavement to the foot onto the scale: you will notice that the scale indicator will exceed your weight (you should read for a while twice your weight, but system itself could be not so fast in "chasing" the actual (maximum) weight value) and then, oscillating it will stabilize onto your weight. Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> he landed on the "heli" landing area I guessed he landed there.... > did you watch the video?! No. Could you please post in here in MPEG format? I would appreciatre so much

> no, it´s not a wingsuit... Yes indeed, I have understood that it has not been done with a wingsuit but with new track pants. I was simply asking: after a 34" tracking freefall, (once having opened the parachute) did he managed to land in the designated landing area or did he have to land on the gravel area? Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> MIL-T-5661 Type I Plain Weave cord is designed to have a breaking strength of 80 lbs (minimum). > That breaking strength is measured with one piece of material pulled in a straight line. > Breaking strength will be reduced by any bends or knots used. WOW!!!!!! Really breaking load is with ONE SINGLE PIECE OF MATERIAL CONNECTING TWO PULLING HEADS?!?!?!?!?!? Until I read your post, I ALWAYS thought that, just because ALL THE BASE MANUFACTURERS were talking about 80 lb break cord and because our use in BASE (for SL jumps) is to tie such a break cord in a loop, the 80 lb breaking load was referred to the break cord ALREADY SET IN A LOOP!!!!!! So, finally, I discover that what we get is NOT the 80 lb break cord being little more robust than the "nominal" value, but actually is the opposite way around. What we actually rig for SL jumps is a 160 lb - 73 kg break cord but because the (surgeon) knot deteriorate (=sharp bending radius) 40% (I didn't imagine the deterioration was so HIGH) of the characteristics of the cord itself, we get something like: 0.6 · (160 lb - 73 kg) = 96 lb - 44 kg That's how comes the 100ish lb value of the tests of sum1sneaky!!!!! I justified the results coming from the tests starting from the wrong break load value!!!!!!! It's true: you never stop learning!!!!! But, honestly, I think that the BASE manufacturers SHOULD inform buyers of break cord about the real value of break load (so when you do a loop you simply get twice the break load) and about the high deterioration (40%) of doing the (surgeon) knot. I mean: it SHOULD be way more evident and way more clear in our world what we are EXACTLY using!!!! Thanks anyway, Mark!!!! Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com

> last weekend he did with his pantz and a new jacket 34 sec Outstanding achievement indeed!!!! And after 34" of freefall, even if with pantz/jacket, where did the chap land? Onto the designated landing area? Or did he land on the gravel after the talus and before the wood? Stay safe out there Blue Skies and Soft Walls BASE #689 - base_689AT_NO_123_SPAMyahoo.com