Camera Flying

[rhys 0]

Quote

Agreed. We wouldn't need blanket rules if we could make good decisions without them.

yes we agree there, for sure.

Quote

But still, are your DZSOs consistent? If someone is told they can't jump a camera or a small canopy or a wingsuit or whatever at one dropzone, can they just go to the competition that never says no? That's always been the problem when it comes to leaving decisions up to one person. A blanket rule is much easier to manage.

We still have recommendations for most things, such as elliptical canopies, cameras.... The DZSO or CI are answerable for their decisions.

But once again, we do not want to be held back as a whole if there is one wanker, do we?

We will always have one wanker, we are human beings. But that wanker should be answerable for his/her actions and there should be systems in place to make sure it is seen that these type do not continue to hold such power.

Quote

I'd still support a rule against jumping cameras before 200 jumps. I think its more important than ever as cameras get smaller, cheaper, and in the eyes of many newbies, safer.

And that is your prerogative.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[airtwardo 7]

I definitely see your point on some of this stuff...

The blanket rules are meant to cover the masses that unfortunately don't get the long term one on one, that us old farts use to.

It's easier to say 200 jumps seems about right, than to evaluate and train the motivated individual that could likely handle some of this stuff.

That being said, 200 jumps use to be a D license, and back when I got mine, it said 'Expert' on it!

I made my first demo, into a stadium wearing smoke with less jumps than today's A license applicants....was jumping with a 'handheld' 16mm camera before I had 100 jumps, because I was around people every weekend that showed me how to do it right.

I'm guilty too...I won't go on a demo with someone that doesn't hold a PRO rating unless I KNOW them really well.

The right way would be to evaluate and help train if necessary, it's just easier to say get the rating.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[rhys 0]

Quote

I made my first demo, into a stadium wearing smoke with less jumps than today's A license applicants....was jumping with a 'handheld' 16mm camera before I had 100 jumps, because I was around people every weekend that showed me how to do it right.

LOL, how times have changed.

Nowdays some people with 200 jumps have only ever dived out of turbines and are too scared to climb out on a Cessna...

bring back static line I say...

The more we pamper people the less competent they become.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

Sounds like you don't get out and around very much if you have yet to see any problems with it. There's a whole world out here...many of us HAVE seen problems with it...directly...up close and personal...and in some cases the aftermath being NOT what one would want to see again...anywhere...at anytime.

These are just words, give us some substance...

Would a grave site be substance enough?

Show me the idiots that you suppose ruin it for the rest.
I suppose you suppose I said that

This seems like a protective attitude the hinders the growth of your people.

can't argue with that. It's true in some cases. It also could be just the protection that someone needed to prevent their injury...but of course, we'll never know that...ever.

This attitude reminds me of ;

Mothers wiping and cleaning everything with antibacterial wipes and soap to keep things clean for their children. Their children get ill more often. Those that are subject to a little dirt have better immune systems...

Well, there is that pesky, small issue of life and death here.
.
.
.
Maybe the problem lies with having 100 jump wonders running around being coaches and S&TA's that do not care enough to know what the people at their DZ are doing.

If someone is not ready, then they should not be allowed to jump camera, this could be at 500 jumps.


It would be hard to argue with that!

It seems you believe that I think that everybody with 100 jumps should put a camera on, this could not be further from the truth.

No, Rhys, I do not think that at all. I agree with your basic thought.

It really comes down to the individual.

Yes, it does. The problem is how do you measure that and who is going to do the measurement?

Right now, with the 200-jump recommendation, USPA is on the hook for that.

You raised the question of Coaches and S&TAs...would you be willing to rely on their judgement to say who can fly camera and who can't? Well, yes, in some cases. Some of them DO have some integrity. But also no, in some cases. I would be reluctant to give it a blanket call and put it all in the S&TAs hands.

Hence, the numbers game. Is it perfect? Hell no! I don't think anyone is arguing THAT! It's simply a line in the sand...a foundation, a very general starting point and it all has to do with reasonable safety. 200 jumps for camera flying is not now, nor has it ever been a hard and fast rule. It's only a cloud...with ragged edges. Fortunately, well hopefully anyway, that number is the result of considered opinion, experience and thought by better people than me. I'm good with it.

I question anyone who blindly says 199 jumps - No, 200 jumps - Yes

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

The blanket rules are meant to cover the masses that unfortunately don't get the long term one on one, that us old farts use to.

It's easier to say 200 jumps seems about right, than to evaluate and train the motivated individual that could likely handle some of this stuff.

...and THAT, my friends, sums it all up in a nutshell.

Unfortunately, that one-on-one is not so common nowadays. Just like the Beer Rules...when is the last time you bought beer to share with your mentors who sat around the bonfire talking skydiving with you?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Ron 10]

Quote

Show me the idiots that you suppose ruin it for the rest.

DSE has created a thread in the video forum.... Start there.

Quote

If you set the rules for the lowest common denominator, you numb those with aptitude and hinder the growth of the sport as a whole.

Nonsense. Making a person wait another 100 jumps does not "hinder the growth of the sport". And that individual could spend those 100 jumps working on skills like sit flying that could HELP the video later.

Quote

If someone is not ready, then they should not be allowed to jump camera, this could be at 500 jumps.


It seems you believe that I think that everybody with 100 jumps should put a camera on, this could not be further from the truth.

And you seem to think 100 is enough. But what if someone else thought 5 was enough? What would YOU consider a min standard?

And yes, you do set rules for the lowest common denominator..... And there is a reason for that.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

That being said, 200 jumps use to be a D license, and back when I got mine, it said 'Expert' on it!

I was joking at the DZ that I should be allowed to speed driving to the DZ since I have a "Master" skydiving license.

One of the group called BS and said that the "D" license was "Expert" not "Master" (It was a joke anyway...But whatev).

So I found my log book and produced a "Master" license.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[ridestrong 1]

Quote

And you seem to think 100 is enough. But what if someone else thought 5 was enough? What would YOU consider a min standard?

How about 200 jump min OR a 'B' license and passing a camera jump course.

*I am not afraid of dying... I am afraid of missing life.*
----Disclaimer: I don't know shit about skydiving.----

[rhys 0]

Quote

And you seem to think 100 is enough. But what if someone else thought 5 was enough? What would YOU consider a min standard?

I doubt there is an institution that allows that under thier regulations.

100 jumps is where i was allowed by my regulations to jump with a camera helmet, the camera did not go in untill jump 102.

The canadian regulations allow 50 jumps, south africa 75, so the rules I was subject to are not by any means the minimum available.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mjosparky 4]

">So I found my log book and produced a "Master" license.



Mine says "Expert".

Sparky

http://www.flickr.com/photos/53825637@N06/5270063201/

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[davelepka 4]

Quote

100 jumps is where i was allowed

You're a terrible example in this case. As previously stated, rules are made for the lowest commen denomenator, and they're made that way for a reason. If you position a rule or regualtion to target the slightly below average jumper, then the rule will be effective for the mojority of the jumpers out there. The only jumpers the rule will 'fail' are those who are well below average, and in the case of camera flying, we would hope that jumpers in that catagory either choose, or are counciled to, not jump a camera at any level.

Back to you being a terrible example, you went on to complete 6500+ jump, earn instructional ratings, and open a DZ. Time has proven you to be an above average jumper, and your thought process and physical aptitiude are such that you and skydiving are a good 'fit'. If we had the ability to see years and 1000's of jumps in to eberyones future, we could tailor their progression based the skydiver they are going to be, but of course we cannot, so we have everyone follow a baseline which is tailored to the lowest common denomenator, so the majoroty of jumpers will err on the side of caution and ease in to more complex skydives.

It's one of the errors I see frequently with the more 'talented' jumpers at any level. It's clear to everyone (and themsleves) that soemthing about them makes them better at this than other people, yet they continue to use their experienced and progression as an example to others. What you need to do is look to the more average jumpers, and base your ideas of progression on their progress and how they perform as they move along and develop as a skydiver.

[Ron 10]

Quote

How about 200 jump min OR a 'B' license and passing a camera jump course.

A good idea. I have always thought proper education can allow a much faster progression.

It would if course depend on the course... AND for it to be a course that held a standard.... But yeah, some guy takes a class from some skilled camera guy that is also a teacher and with good materials and a held standard... I think it would be a good idea.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[rhys 0]

Quote

You're a terrible example in this case. As previously stated, rules are made for the lowest commen denomenator, and they're made that way for a reason.

Now we are delving into personal opinions, and disregarding the history of what is done in countries other than your own.

It is clear that you, and a bunch of other die hard; 'The USPA way is the Best way' advocates, disagree with the administration of skydiving in a number of countries including your neighbours, Canada.

Canada has recently lowered the number from 100 to 50. make you blood boil?

There is a reason they did that, my guess is to advance the progression on the jumpers there.

But I am not going to argue with you about it, you are entitled to beleve what you wish.

Whatever you beleive or say, does not change the fact that the rules are different in other countries and if someone is following the rules of the country and dropzone they belong to, then they are doing no wrong.

It amuses me how difficult it is for so many to comprehend this.

If a US tandem master with 780 jumps shows up at a DZ in NZ or south africa, they will be told to go and get (at least) another 220 jumps before considering transfering thier rating.

Much as a jumper with 150 jumps from NZ with a camera set up thay have jumped a bunch of times will (likely) be asked to make another 50 jumps before using it at many DZ's in the USA.

What is so fucking hard to understand about that?

And what does it have to do with me?

You can turn right at a red light in traffic in the USA and in NZ it is against the law to turn on a red light, ever.

This world is interesting because we have our differences.

Quote

The only jumpers the rule will 'fail' are those who are well below average, and in the case of camera flying, we would hope that jumpers in that catagory either choose, or are counciled to, not jump a camera at any level.

With a stetment like that, it appears that there is a serious lack of supervision going on in your realm, that scenario is not likely to happen here. you need the approval of the DZSO to advance your progression.

Quote

Back to you being a terrible example, you went on to complete 6500+ jump, earn instructional ratings, and open a DZ. Time has proven you to be an above average jumper, and your thought process and physical aptitiude are such that you and skydiving are a good 'fit'. If we had the ability to see years and 1000's of jumps in to eberyones future, we could tailor their progression based the skydiver they are going to be, but of course we cannot, so we have everyone follow a baseline which is tailored to the lowest common denomenator, so the majoroty of jumpers will err on the side of caution and ease in to more complex skydives.

errrrr, O.K.

Pretty much most jumpers I know in NZ and Aussie have had a similar progression, from jump 1 to jumping camera, but over varying periods of time.

I am not an exception in this example I am the norm, in this part of the world.

Just ask any Australian skydiver or kiwi skydiver you may meet. The fact that I went on to do 1000's of jumps in a handful of years is not uncommon either.

Maybe it is uncommon where you are from, and that is probably why you are having difficulty dealing with this.

Quote

It's one of the errors I see frequently with the more 'talented' jumpers at any level. It's clear to everyone (and themsleves) that soemthing about them makes them better at this than other people, yet they continue to use their experienced and progression as an example to others. What you need to do is look to the more average jumpers, and base your ideas of progression on their progress and how they perform as they move along and develop as a skydiver.

Seriously, what a bunch of bullshit.

I you re insulting thousands of people because you want to jump on a high horse. You will find the both Kiwis and Australians are humble and straight forward people. This has nothing to do with Ego or the inability to understand the needs of the less experienced jumpers.

Your attitude towards the subject seems very one sided.

You guys have a very different culture to us, and the differences are shining through in your comments right now, you seem to be unaware of how insulting to so many people the coments you just made were, and how superior in opinion you make yourself out to be.

What ever happened to a difference in opinion?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[airtwardo 7]

You guys have a very different culture to us, and the differences are shining through in your comments right now, you seem to be unaware of how insulting to so many people the comments you just made were, and how superior in opinion you make yourself out to be.

What ever happened to a difference in opinion?

...all the people that think they know it all, really piss off those of us who DO!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Ron 10]

Here is the thing I find funny. You have said before that your country requires 1000k jumps to be a TI and that you think that is better than the US's 500.... That 1000k is better than 500.But you take the 100% opposite view when it comes to video.... That your country has it right again and the US is wrong again.

Why is 1000 better than 500, but 200 not better than 100????

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[julio_gyn 0]

guys, that is an endless thread. I think if people look back and see how safe are todays equipment, and 30 years ago people used to jump huge cameras and not really safe equipment. All the tecnology used around skydiving can help to modify limits, I have seen a thread where the jumpmaster on another guy first jump had only a few jumps, not enough to complete a todays SL course.... why people don't look at the success and find some other ways to teach and develop knoledge on todays student? I don't care for camera, my target is between rigging and aff, so don't bother wondering I want to change rules to hookup a shit of a gopro on my helmet....

Julio Cesar
blue skies

[billvon 2,990]

>I think if people look back and see how safe are todays equipment, and
>30 years ago people used to jump huge cameras and not really safe
>equipment.

Agreed. However, the primary risk of a camera is not the weight, size or snag hazard; it is the distraction.

>I have seen a thread where the jumpmaster on another guy first jump
>had only a few jumps, not enough to complete a todays SL course . . .

Right. I started doing SL JM'ing with just over 100 jumps. But the tasks a typical instructor must concentrate on nowadays are a little different; more is expected of an AFF _instructor_ than of a SL _JM_. Really, what we got our $5 a load for was to make sure the SL got hooked up before the student climbed out. The instructor did all the teaching.

And perhaps there's a lesson there for camera flyers. Perhaps that intermediate step (just make sure the SL gets hooked up, help em climb out) could be applied to camera flying. Make 20, 30, 50 jumps _without_ a camera, being in the right spot. Do everything else; the alternate climb out, being where you want to be on the skydive, taking the center on breakoff etc. THEN add the camera.

[mjosparky 4]

You are probably thing of this one. That was a long time ago. Both Bill and Tommy are now gone.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2216290#2216290

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[davelepka 4]

Quote

It's one of the errors I see frequently with the more 'talented' jumpers at any level. It's clear to everyone (and themsleves) that soemthing about them makes them better at this than other people, yet they continue to use their experienced and progression as an example to others. What you need to do is look to the more average jumpers, and base your ideas of progression on their progress and how they perform as they move along and develop as a skydiver.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Seriously, what a bunch of bullshit.

I you re insulting thousands of people because you want to jump on a high horse. You will find the both Kiwis and Australians are humble and straight forward people. This has nothing to do with Ego or the inability to understand the needs of the less experienced jumpers.

Your attitude towards the subject seems very one sided.

You guys have a very different culture to us, and the differences are shining through in your comments right now, you seem to be unaware of how insulting to so many people the coments you just made were, and how superior in opinion you make yourself out to be.

What ever happened to a difference in opinion?

I don't see where you get that from what I said. It's nto my opinion that a guy with 6500+ jumps, instructional ratings and is now a DZO is not an average jumper. Like it or not, want to admit it or not, you are in the upper percentile of jumper achievement.

Maybe you're mistake is that you spend too much time at tandem fatories, where everyone around (who you get to know) has 5, 10, or even 15 thousand jumps, but they are also in the same upper percentile as you in terms of jumper achievement.

The simple fact is that what worked for you may not be a good indicator of what would work for a more average jumper, the same type of jumper you need to tailor rules and regualtions to.

Sure Norm Kent was jumpuing a belly mounted VHS recorder with something under 50 jumps, but as it turned out, Norm Kent is one of the worlds top camera flyers. Something about him and camera flying go together, and unless you have that something, using him as an example is a bad idea.

I'm not trying to appear superior, and in fact all I did was call you superior to the average jumper. I'm also not trying to elevate myself above others, I'm stating a simple fact. One of the biggest problems with regualting progression in skydiving is that you never really know who is ready for what until it's over.

Think you're ready to jump a 79 Velo? You might be, and the only real way to find out is to do it. Put 100 jumps on one, and if you survive, it turns out you were ready. If you kill or injure yourself, maybe not.

The problem is that the risk of being wrong is often much higher than the rewards of being right. If a jumper does push the envelope, and jumps a 79 early on, success means just that the one single jumper has some thrills on their skydives. It creates no benefit to others on the DZ or otherwsie. If the jumper should be wrong, however, the effects can be widespread and dire. People on the DZ who have to witness and deal with an incident, the bad publicity for the DZ, the jumpers family who have to deal with the loss or caring for a crippled relative for the rest of their lives.

Push the limits, and succeed, you make only yourself happy. Push them and fail, you create a negative impact on all the people in your life who care about you. Some simple restraint on your part, some additional experience and training could easily spare your loved ones the heartache.

So we're stuck in this position where you don't really know if anyone is ready for everything until it's over. What we do, in that case, is err on the side of caution, and wait until you're chances for success are really good, and then move forward.

As this applies to you, or me, or any other long time or high-time jumper is that we have proven ourselves to be ready. As it turned out, we did have the skills, knowledge, and ability to handle the choices we made, and we handled them well enough to continue on in the sport, and advance even further. This is the evidence that you or I have whatever 'it' is that you need to be a skydiver.

This isn't insulting to anyone, it's just the way it is. Anyone who would be insulted by that isn't thinking logically and is trying to protect their ego, neither of which is good for skydiving.

[julio_gyn 0]

Quote

>Agreed. However, the primary risk of a camera is not the weight, size or snag hazard; it is the distraction.
...
And perhaps there's a lesson there for camera flyers. Perhaps that intermediate step (just make sure the SL gets hooked up, help em climb out) could be applied to camera flying. Make 20, 30, 50 jumps _without_ a camera, being in the right spot. Do everything else; the alternate climb out, being where you want to be on the skydive, taking the center on breakoff etc. THEN add the camera.

could be camera or any other addition on the dive, I think the rules could be changed to make all the progreesion a 'student dependent' thing, IF somebody has all the abilities and prove it to the instructors, a special attention can be spent to teach the right way. a good example is, why let a guy fly a wingsuit with 200 jumps if he is not good tracking????

Julio Cesar
blue skies

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

why let a guy fly a wingsuit with 200 jumps if he is not good tracking????

Right. Aren't there still several OTHER pre-requisites (other than JUST raw jump #'s) as well? I think you are assuming that JUST BECAUSE someone has attained 200 jumps, they are automatically "qualified" to jump a WS. - I don't think that is the case. - - - Is it?

I am not a WSI, so you would have to ask one of those, but still - it would be hard for me to believe, from those that I at least know of - that someone showing up on the DZ, with say jump #201 exactly under his belt, is going to necessarily just have a wingsuit just handed to him, and told: "here you go kid, you've earned it ...go on out there and have at it!"

Your analogy therein is flawed.

But then again - I could too still, be completely wrong. - Any wingsuit instructor(s) ...wanna correct me/chime in?

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[dragon2 2]

Correct, plus actually I don't care all that much about a person's ability to track well.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DSE 5]

Quote

I am not a WSI, so you would have to ask one of those, but still - it would be hard for me to believe, from those that I at least know of - that someone showing up on the DZ, with say jump #201 exactly under his belt, is going to necessarily just have a wingsuit just handed to him, and told: "here you go kid, you've earned it ...go on out there and have at it!"

Your analogy therein is flawed.

But then again - I could too still, be completely wrong. - Any wingsuit instructor(s) ...wanna correct me/chime in?

I'm not a WSI, only self-appointed WSI#1 has that distinction, and he didn't feel having someone wait til 200 jumps was enough. Ask that guy how his jump went.

If you have 200 jumps and want to fly a wingsuit (and come to me) you're likely going to do a tracking dive with me first unless we've flown together before.
Then we'll do a ground school that isn't terribly different from AFF with some abbreviations (lasts about 45-60 mins). Then we'll go up and jump together assuming all things on the ground went as designed.

The thing is, at 200 jumps, you barely have enough muscle memory to deal with common situations as they occur.
The four states:
Unconsciously Incompetent (you don't know what you don't know)
Consciously Incompetent (You know what you don't know but don't know what to do about it)
Consciously Competent (you know what you're doing, but you have to think about it)
Unconciously Competent (You know what you know, and don't need to think about reacting/responding because it's ingrained/embedded).

At 200 jumps, you might have enough muscle memory to deal with a loss of altitude awareness, spin, person near you at deployment time, or malfunction that ties up the camera/wingsuit.
With very specific training, we can help people become consciously competent fairly quickly. Taking a camera course from Norman Kent when I had 70 jumps helped me grow fast. Spending a lot of time in the tunnel with various camera flyers helped me a lot too. I do believe that with specific, proper, and tightly focused training, people can be properly trained, but this isn't the "norm."
Miltary jumpers are dropping bundles at jump 25, essentially tandem masters at 25 jumps. But their training is very tightly focused in a very tight, specific environment that doesn't translate well into the general skydiving world.
I do not believe that learning basic muscle memory during a camera or wingsuit jump is the proper way to learn, but that's just my opinion. Obviously others disagree.

[Scrumpot 1]

In other words, 200 jumps is not just an "automatic qualifier" for WS jumping, about the same as it should not just necessarily be as so for camera flying either. Rather, it is just a minimum threshold, that must be attained - at which time whereby IF as well, - all the OTHER additional required skillsets are also exhibited (or trained) the additional activity can then be started.

I truly don't understand all the consternation of some of the "mad skillz" group subsets. I mean really - IF indeed they do posess all those mad-skillz already, and claim they (supposedly) have obtained them all in a total of sub-200 total jumps, and they feel they are "ready" - BIG DEAL. It really won't be that much longer at all (I mean how many jumps, sub-200, # can you REALLY have attained all the skillz/aptitudes you need?) - - - that they will just SOON ENOUGH get to that 200 # anyway. And heck, as they seem to already assert - when they do, they ARE ready & will be good to go!"

The other side of that though, is again - that the jump # component, just in and of itself is not just stand-alone "automatic qualification". Many jumpers may in fact take even longer/need many more jumps to attain the skillsets needed, ALSO pre-requisite to doing camera or WS jumps. No one is holding back those mad-skillz subset group(s). IF you've (supposedly) got the skillz - fine. Remember too, that NOT ALL 200 # JUMP JUMPERS NECESSARILY JUST AUTOMATICALLY QUALIFY EITHER.

To Julio_gyn: The progression already IS individual "student (ability) dependent". Just get the 200 minimum jumps too is all. I mean really - Big Deal.

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[TiaDanger 0]

Somebody further up the thread suggested having a camera instruction course. Being in the 150 jump range myself with the wish of someday jumping a camera, I think that's a fantastic idea.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wingsuit instructional courses are on the rise, and aren't there now official 'wingsuit instructors' when there never used to be? And wouldn't you say its been beneficial for people entering winsuiting? Overall, you produce a winsuiter that is now probably safer and better than if they would have gotten spotty guidance from multiple people.

Same goes for camera flying. If there were camera instruction courses, it gives newbies like me a disciplined path to becoming a safe camera flyer. From what I've seen, it can be difficult to single a camera flyer out and become their understudy. They either are too busy working or maybe just frankly don't want to waste jumps or time to teach an infant vidiot.

BUT...if there were a comprehensive video course that teaches safety, body positioning, camera basics, and other techniques, I'd be the first to sign up and pay for that instruction. I would learn much faster doing that than hitting up camera fliers for tips every other jump.

Maybe there already is some camera instruction course out there that I don't know about. If so, disregard this and give me some contact info so I can find it!

And for the record: the appropriate ranking of cool modes of transportation is jet pack, hover board, transporter, Batmobile, and THEN giant ant.
D.S. #8.8