Divalent

Well, it ain't purdy, but I hand made this line deflector with moldable plastic (Instamorph; melts at ~140F/60C). And it's not really a mount, but rather a deflector mounted around a standard GoPro stick-on mount. (You have to reverse the mount so that the camera slides in from the back, rather than the more usual from-the-front. The opening at the front is to allow me to get my fingers in to unmount the camera.) It's attached to the helmet using 3-M mounting tape, the same stuff that holds the GoPro mount to the helmet.

I'm not at all convinced by his arguments that cycling helmets decrease safety for cyclists (there are a lot of red herrings in his post that clutter up his discussion, and he makes strong conclusions from the reports that he cites that don't appear in the reports that he cites). But that is a discussion to be had elsewhere. But for the sake of comparison, assuming his argument is sound and his contentions proved, his position mostly boils down to four *possible* reasons why helmets decrease safety: 1. Risk homeostasis on the part of the wearer (cyclists do more risky things when wearing a helmet they wouldn't otherwise do if they were helmetless). 2. Specific risk homeostasis on the part of car drivers (they give less room to helmeted cyclists). 3. Helmets reduce # of cyclers on the roads, and car drivers then become less accustomed to their presence, and so less likely to be mindful of how to drive safely in their presence. (I.e., a general risk homeostasis). 4. Possible increased injury in some accident situations due to bulk, size, shape, etc of the helmet. Based on that (and, again, assuming he is correct on these point for the sake of discussion), I don't see it as a good analogy for use of an AAD on a skydiving rig. Risk homeostasis on the part of the wearer (point #1) might be analogous, although only weakly so in skydiving. About the only thing I think might be a situation where a jumper would do a jump they wouldn't do without an AAD are the ones that pose a higher risk of midair collision (large tracking or angle or wingsuit group jumps, etc). So maybe more risky behavior overall due to AAD. But I'll note that risk homeostasis is not necessarily a bad thing. It does allow you to experience the benefit of things that you wouldn't have experience. Risk homeostasis on the part of others (#2): I can't think a way that others would behave in a way that would increase my risk on a jump because they specifically knew that I had an AAD on that jump. Point #3 really is not analogous at all. Skydivers have little risk from whuffos, and so even if AADs mean fewer jumps made (a doubt this is a significant effect on jump numbers), I don't see how a whuffo's familiarity with what skydivers do could be a factor. (Nor can I imagine how other jumpers would alter their behavior due to their being less accustomed to other jumpers in the air.) Fatality rates in skydiving have gone down (fatalities per million jumps). And there is clear evidence that AADs have contributed to that, which counters his point #4. There is good documentation of the many lives saved over the years; many more than were killed by having an AAD. So even if one assumes the writer made a good argument for the dangers of helmets in cycling, I don't think an analogous argument works to show AADs are a danger in skydiving.

It would be a good idea to run it by your instructors, who can actually look at them. One thing you want to be sure you can do with any pair of goggles you use is to be able to see your cutaway and reserve handles when you are wearing them. It's not that important in skiing and snowboarding to be able to see your own chest area, but it is in skydiving. Put on your rig and and see if you can still see those when you have those goggles on. If you want something inexpensive that works really well, consider a pair of these: http://www.chutingstar.com/skydive/sky-eyes-goggles

IMO, an important benefit of getting video is that there will be someone else flying near you during freefall. It gives you something to focus on (rather than just staring into that big void of air in front of you) and gives you a better perspective about what freefall is all about. IMO, I'd rate that benefit above the "relive the jump" one, as it will make the jump much more interesting.

You obviously did not use the Express Service. Mine was delivered before I even ordered it. Concrete Rebound Hammer delivers faster

AT&T worked fine for me last year (except it changed my phone time to an hour early ). Not sure if that was a one time thing, or whether they installed a tower and it's permanent. Their coverage map still shows no coverage in the Fitzgerald area.

Never heard of Apocalyptica? 4 classically trained cellists that do metal. Here's "I Don't Care" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxDcWvZCSRg

Funny how God helps people through the acts of the medical doctors and the scientists that created life savings drugs and vaccines, yet he's only been doing that since the mid-20th century. People have been praying for such help for tens of thousands of years. Why now, after billions of people died in the past due to his lack of action? And why does he do it in a way that makes it look like those doctors and scientists were the ones that did it all on their own, without consulting any religious documents? [Is there any evidence that, even theoretically, could disprove your God hypothesis?]

A woman was very distraught at the fact that she had not had a date or any sex in quite some time. She was afraid she might have something wrong with her, so she decided to seek the medical expertise of a sex therapist. Her doctor recommended that she see Dr. Chang, the well-known Chinese sex therapist, so she went to see him. Upon entering the examination room, Dr. Chang said, "OK, take off all you crose." The woman did as she was told. "Now, get down and craw reery, reery fass to odder side of room." Again, the woman did as she was instructed. Dr. Chang then said, "OK, now craw reery, reery fass back to me." So she did. Dr. Chang shook his head slowly and said, "Your probrem vewy bad. You haf Ed Zachary Disease. Worse case I ever see. Dat why you not haf sex or dates." Worried, the woman asked anxiously, "Oh my God, Dr. Chang, what is Ed Zachary Disease?" Dr. Chang looked the woman in the eye and replied, "Ed Zachary Disease is when your face rook Ed Zachary rike your ass."

The Iowa one was not included as it was (apparently) an observer on a flight intended to ferry the plane to another location for maintanence, and the person (apparently) did not intend to jump. Not that it means one can't learn from it, but my intent was to include incidents that represent actual risks to those as they engage in the sport. The washington one is a much closer call: technically since he exited an aircraft, it was a sport skydive, and if one wants to compile a list that meets the technical definition, that is fine. But IMO, wingsuit proxy flying is a BASE discipline, with the technicality of how the jump was launched, or whether or not he had a useless reserve so that it was a legal jump, mostly beside the point.

Apparently the Denver Broncos have their own skydiving demo group, the Denver Broncos Thunderstorm, that jumps at their home games. Here's video from yesterday's AFC Championship game. video by a spectator: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1re0M_yH1M video by one of the jumpers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWOON1D9LnE Looks like the last jumper hit some turbulance right about level with the top of the stadium just before turning to land.

How about this: 1) Review/talk with an instructor to get pointers on what you want to do (also reread the other thread I linked you to above: some good advice in there). 2) And then on *every* jump from altitude, unless you have a reason not to (like, jumping with someone else and it is *essential* that you exit a different way), exit as if you are doing a hop and pop and do a practice touch on your main handle.

Is this the type of flying you want to do? http://vimeo.com/18150336 It's a couple of years old, but the 13 wingsuiters shown in the video were the very best of the best at the time.

2013 US sport skydiving fatailities involving a helmet mounted camera: 0 2012 US sport skydiving fatailities involving a helmet mounted camera: 0 2011 US sport skydiving fatailities involving a helmet mounted camera: 0 2010 US sport skydiving fatailities involving a helmet mounted camera: 0 2009 US sport skydiving fatailities involving a helmet mounted camera: 0 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4565179#4565386 (Can I get back on your lawn please? )

Since this thread seems to have become about RSLs (because in 2013, 4 fatalities followed a low cutaway, and all 4 lacked an RSL), I'll note the following from the two years prior to 2013: 2011 - 1 died after a low cutaway, no RSL 2012 - 2 died after low cutaways, both had an RSL (one was student) In addition, 2011 - 3 died riding a main mal to the ground with no cutaway (one was student) 2012 - 2 died riding a main mal to the ground with no cutaway (In 2013, no fatalities resulted from riding a main mal into the ground.) I note the "no cutaway" ones to point out that there may be cases where experienced jumpers lose altitude awareness all the way to the ground. (I say "may" because it may be the case that some of those no-cutaway ones the jumpers were incapacitated; we just don't know.) There were probably thousands of main mals last year where a reserve was deployed in time to land safely, with and without RSLs, so what we are looking at are the tail end of the distribution down low: most respond in time, some get extremely close, some eventually act but too late, and others never realize they are too low before the planet kills them. (And in some cases, it's not the altitude they chop at that can be the problem, it's finding the reserve handle in time.)

Have you looked at this thread? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4564380 (And IMO, if you are focused on pulling quick, then you are doing it wrong. Practicing the exit at altitude is the smart way to go about it.)

Question: is it important that he not leave behind evidence of his visit? Or, at least evidence how the visit was done? (I.e., if something is missing, the owner would know someone came in, but if there was skydiving/BASE gear left behind, that might let them know who did it). I like the idea mentioned by JohnMitchell above about him having to have a cutaway. Always more dramatic when things don't go according to plan, and he has to improvise. Here's a shot at it: The plan: Use a skydiving rig to land on the roof (using his main), then rappel (with rope he brought with him) down to the apt. He can either get out by jumping from the apt patio, or he could to climb back up the rope and leave from the roof (allowing him to take all his gear with him). He leaves using his reserve (with the main canopy stuff back into the main compartment). For his exit jump he either ties his reserve pilot chute / bridle to the building railing so that his exit will be a static line, or if he can't leave stuff behind, he fully extracts his reserve and hangs it over the edge and does a rollover (so that he can take the reserve PC and free bag with him). What actually happens: Complication 1: he has a malfunction on his main parachute (a spinning lineover would be common) and has to cutaway and land with his reserve. Complication 2: he's lost a lot of altitude with his main mal and reserve deployment, and as he nears the building, figures out that he will descend below the level of the building roof before he actually reaches the building. So now he either has to abort, or go for the dangerous penthouse landing (which he does). Now he has to use the rollover exit with his reserve to get out, as he no longer has a reserve pilot chute / bridle to do a static line. (note: have him unlock the front door so they think he entered and exited through it (and perhaps they waste time looking at survailance cameras in the lobby that might id him.))

I probably should have put the "no RSL" in as a parenthetical, as in "Low cutaway (no RSL)", so that it wouldn't seem like the absense of an RSL was a clearly known factor in the fatality. For all we know from these incidents, a RSL might not have made a difference. (Or it might have; we just don't know). However, the larger point is that last year 4 people died after cutting away their main but then failing to get their reserve out in time. And all 4 of those individuals did not have an RSL on the rig they were jumping. I don't know exactly what proportion of jumpers use an RSL (50%? More? Less?) but it does seem notable to me that all the fatalities from cutting away low involved those without one. It may be a statistical fluke, or it may be indicative of an actual risk.

Probably because the reserve did not open in time. All an AAD does is cut the loop. It does not open your reserve. It’s up to the jumper to save their life. These 2 jumpers failed to that. Sparky Well, I'd like to know why two AADs and reserves on two separate rigs simultaneously failed to prevent both from impacting the ground at a lethal velocity. I don't expect perfection, but I would really like to know what the failure point was here. Yes, it's a chain of failures that each started with the jumpers failing to deploy a parachute in time. And I know what to do to avoid that when I jump (and I hope that I do). The AAD information on activation speed and altitude from each unit must be known to some, and that information should allow us to understand what the next failure was. - Did the AADs not operate as expected? (And if so, why not and in what way?) - If the AADs operated as expected, were the conditions at the time (velocity, body orientation) outside the normal range that the AAD expected? (And if so, in what way?) - If the conditions were as normally expected, and the AADs fired at the properly programed time, then both reserves must have not deployed as rapidly as expected. If so, why not? (Reserve packing error? Equipment maintanence? Non-ideal reserve size? Container design flaw? Reserve PC flaw?) I want to know these because I'd like to reduce the risk that I hit the ground at a fatal speed (as much as reasonably possible while still enjoying jumping). Right now all I know is that this dual incidents reveals that the reliability of those particular AAD/Reseve/container combinations were less than I had expected. But we are being kept in the dark about the chain of failures, and so have no information about what the second failures were. Consequently, I have no idea how to *best* reduce the risk of whatever this second failure was. So "Don't fuck up" (while certainly true) is not all that useful a lesson to take away from these two incidents.

Here is a brief overview of the 2013 US sport skydiving fatalities, based on those incidents reported in the Incidents forum here. There were a total of 22 sport skydiving fatalities (compared to 17 in 2012 and 24 in 2011). Two involved tandem jumps (in both, the TI died). Of the 20 non-tandem fatalities, 16 were experienced jumpers (400 hundred jumps or more), 1 low timer (a no pull on a HALO jump), and 3 students* (1 no pull, 1 tail strike, 1 low turn). [* the "student" in the 6/16/13 Utah incident may have just competed her A license shortly before she died.] 10 of the 20 non-tandem fatalities followed the successful deployment of a good canopy. 4 of the 20 non-tandem fatalities were the result of a deliberate attempt to induce speed for landing (i.e, a high performance landing) and 2 were from low turns apparently initiated to alter the landing spot or direction. Zero fatalities due to a canopy collision during a HP landing. If anything is can be said to be notable (in a bad way) about 2013, it was the 4 fatalities of experienced jumpers due to a "Low Cutaway, no RSL". Complete list is below. #1&2 Zhills 3/23/13 Student no pull, AFFI chased low, double AAD fire, neither survived. Student and (EJ) #3 Washington, NC. 4/6/13 dropped toggle after front riser acceleration on final (EJ; GC) #4 New Mexico – 4/27/13 HP landing (EJ; GC) #5 Deland FL 5/8/13 - Low cutaway, no RSL. (EJ) #6 Palatka FL 5/25/13 - Low cutaway, no RSL. (EJ) #7 Elsinore CA 5/25/13 CReW wrap, unable to cut free (EJ; GC) #8 Deland FL 5/25/2013 Hard opening broke jumper's neck. (EJ) #9 SD Warren Co, OH. - 5/26/13 RW based struck and killed by diving LTer (EJ) #10 Snohomish WA 5/31/13 - HP landing (aggressive downsizer) (EJ; GC) #11 SD Spaceland TX 6/15/13 - Low cutaway, no RSL. (EJ) #12 Skydive Utah 6/16/13 Student (recent A lic?) low turn (to avoid obstacle?) (GC) #13 Wisconsin 7/9/13 Tandem lake landing due to winds; TI drowned (EJ; GC) #14 Hawaii 7/23/13 Student tail strike on hop-pop (no cut / no level jump run) #15 Chicago 8/1/13 - Low cutaway, no RSL. (EJ) #16 Goldcoast MS, 8/3/13 Tandem TI died, pax paralyzed. Main cutaway, landed off. Details still unknown. (EJ) #17 Skydance Davis, CA 8/24/13 Fell from harness under good main; chest strap undone. Accidental? (EJ; GC) #18 Skydive West TN 9/23/13 HALO jump from 30K. Apparent no pull, no AAD. Details still unknown (LT?) #19 Midwest Freefall, MI 10/12/13 HP landing (EJ; GC) #20&21 Arizona 12/3/13 Canopy collision ~150ft on final after 200-way attempt. (EJx2; GCx2) #22 Perris, CA – 12/27/13 Low turn (~50 ft) on landing (EJ; GC) Key to codes used above EJ = Experienced Jumper (400+ jumps) LT = Low Timer (< 100 jumps) relatively inexperienced but not a student GC = Good main Canopy deployed (+ no complications shortly thereafter) HP = deliberate High Performance turn (i.e., not forced by conditions or inexperience)

back in the days when i started this jumping-thingy, my instructor said "dude, DO NOT EVER take ANY advice from dropzone.com; it's DANGEROUS!". he does have a point.. I'd like to strongly disagree with this sentiment. I restarted skydiving just about 3 years ago, and this place can be a source of valuable information. The key is to have a strong set of filters in place, and to hang here long enough to figure out the reputation of the people who post here to know whether or not they are credible. And to pay attention to how something that is said is responded to by others of high reputation. Which is why I found Chris so odious: most people who spew BS here are (once you know them) pretty clearly spewing BS. Chris created this phony persona pretending to be a long time highly experienced well connected instructor. He wasn't easy to see thru. (IMO, his account should be banned from the skydiving forums; limit him to the bonfire only).

You kind of snuck in an unrelated advertisement there, didn't you? You mean you don't jump with at least one Hotel safe?

Ya. Maybe at Fitz? (PS: Congrats!)

In your case, both. You are a bullshitter pretenting to be an expert. You lie, and you do so deliberately with the intent to deceive people. And most of the crap you spew is just that: crap. And you are not anonymous: you have posted your real name here and your profile has a real email. What license do you have and what is the number on your license?

As wolfriverjoe mentioned, the 299 is probably just FJC and first jump. Other packages will consist of the FJC and all 7 AFF jumps (and other places may also include a tandem). Further, you may also see packages for the full A-license, which would include FJC, 7 AFF jumps, and then an additional 18 jumps (with a variable number including a coach) to get your A license; those packages would be in the $2-3k range. (And some will include additional things such as a bound copy of the SIM, a Log book, USPA membership, and/or possibily even some accessories like goggles, etc). In general, the full license packages will save you a lot, but the downside is you'd have to front all the moeny at the start. Before you are licensed, gear rental would be included in the price, but after that, you will need your own (unless you want to jump rental gear all the time). To get to 200 jumps, you will need an A license, your own gear (rig, altimeter, helmet, goggles, suit, etc), so you'd be wise to cost it out on that basis.