velvetjo

Here's an example of a shot from a Canon 10-22mm lens on a Canon Rebel XTi at 10mm without fisheye distortion. Hope that helps you make more sense of what folks are saying above. And the Canon 10-22 is my favorite lens for freefall shots, to go back on topic for just a moment.

Oddly enough, many of the experienced folks who support the 200 jump recommendation have many of the same military and sports qualifications that you list. You may not be as special as you think you are.

Rob, That's what I was looking for - firsthand experience with problems using the modified slide. It's certainly not ideal for rough terrain. I was pretty skeptical when I initially saw it taught in a FJC, but after seeing it for 5+ years I'm convinced it has a place in every jumper's toolkit. Kinda like brake turns - not something you'll use every time, but something you want to know how to do in case you need it. Lance

I've seen a student program firsthand that has very good success with teaching a modified baseball slide for downwind landings. They have students tuck one foot up under their butt and extend the other leg forward. It protects the spine / tailbone somewhat and there's less chance of damage to the extremities than a tumbling "PLF" with fast horizontal speed. Since most jumpers can't do a PLF to Airborne standards even under good conditions, there's a pretty significant risk of head or neck injury from a bad tumble. PLF's convert vertical motion to horizontal by design, but that's not as much of a concern if you're moving downwind fast. After seeing both teaching methods in practice over periods of years, I'm sold on the modified baseball slide for fast downwinders. Even for students. You claim the PLF is safer in this situation, but that contradicts my direct experience. I'm curious: what incidents or injuries have you seen from actually teaching students the slide method that formed this opinion? Lance

What?? Are you going to judge this dude based on Mountain Dew consumption numbers? Everyone knows that's totally inaccurate, because he could have mad skillz and be doing quality consumption with coaching that puts him way ahead of the game. In fact, just switching to Code Red easily cuts the numbers in half, because it's waaaay more extreme. And that's not even taking into consideration any previous Red Bull experience. To the OP: The worldwide instructor endorsement is just a hologram sticker that they put on your worldwide drivers license. I heard that the Karnage Krew website has them for sale. Lance

A great way to learn how to fly with tandems is getting a coach rating and then actually using it. If done right, you'll learn these fabulous skills: - what to look for on exit timing (good & bad) - how to fall straight down - improved situational awareness - rapid fall rate adjustments - anticipating fall rate changes - how to deal with students Mix this up with chasing bad RW groups for a while with video & stills. Then it'll be time to think about filming tandems. Lance

The good news is that he can use a can opener as a camera cutaway. Lance

Realizing that this applies differently in different countries due to the age of majority and other contract law...I'm looking at this from a US perspective. Aside from the moral & ethical implications of hurting or killing others due to your inexperience, there are other issues. So, let's say you take personal responsibility for chasing a tandem without the manufacturer's required experience. How does that help the TM, video flyer, DZO, or equipment manufacturers who have to protect their personal assets and businesses from the fallout when your accepted risk gets them sued? Does it pay for the legal costs, medical bills, or lost wages? I'm guessing "no". The idea of "taking personal responsibility" for everything that happens on your skydive is pretty much a farce. When you leave the plane, you're putting the pilot's commercial ticket at risk since the FAA says he's responsible for whatever you do, despite the fact that he has very little actual control over it. Like it or not, everyone gets dragged into the problem if you screw up. Kill or hurt somebody, and how much weight will that line have in any investigation, lawsuit, or FAA enforcement action? I'm guessing "not much". Be aware of what you're asking people to risk when you make a request like this. It's not trivial. As far swooping a tandem vs. exiting with them, questioning your own ability to fly a relative exit without grips would be a red flag. Enough so to make me ask you to stay away completely. That said, swooping the tandem does take interfering with the drogue throw out of play for the most part. Lance

Davy, don't sweat the teeth, just come on out for Safety Day. See you there! Lance

Davy, watch out for surfergrrrrl, now that she knows you're toothless, you're in real trouble. Go to sleep on a couch in the Delmarva front room at your own risk...there are cougars on the prowl! Lance (from Delmarva)

Some of those composites are great! Nice site. Lance

Military aero clubs generally have great rates for renting aircraft. That's a pretty rare thing, so take advantage of it while you can. You'll see a lot more of Alaska with a pilot's license, and be a better pilot for starting out in an area where aviation is still pretty raw. One of the coolest things about aviation up there is that it's actually valued by society, not taken for granted and kicked around. That said, you should do at least a jump or two while you're there, just for the view if nothing else. Have a blast either way! Lance

Does that also mean that you'll be discontinuing use of all US-manufactured gear (including tandem systems), gear developed from US-innovated patents (including 3-ring releases), US developed aircraft (like C-185's), and the like? Does that mean that you're planning to ignore all of the experience you gained while working as a skydiver in the US and all of the training methods developed in the US? If so, you may need to make some significant operational changes to your fledgling DZ. If not, you may not want to opt out of the cluster just yet. Like it or not, US laws (and even ethics) will continue to impact you if you continue to use these products. We all have a lot to learn from each other, so why not relax and enjoy the process a little bit, eh? Best of luck with your DZ start-up, that's a pretty big undertaking for anyone. Lance

If you do jump a camera with less than 200 jumps, please do it at Rhys' DZ. Cheers, mate! Lance

The two things that underlie most of these responses are situational awareness and judgment. Both of these take a lot longer than flying skills to hone, and that's why UPT's minimum tandem outside video requirements make sense. Getting an instructional rating goes a long way toward making a safe, competent camera flyer. If you're going to be shooting tandem and AFF video, it's a smart idea to have at minimum the rudimentary understanding of instruction that a coach rating affords. Coaching students (without a camera) will also greatly improve your flying abilities, judgment, and situational awareness. Lance

You might want to check out this system guide from Videoguys.com. Another one that I found useful is here at ArsTechnica. Both are updated pretty regularly. Lance

Looked into various keyboards, but ended up getting a Shuttle Xpress and regular keyboard instead. It's worked well for us this season. Lance

The same thing can be accomplished with a perpendicular wedge of plastic (same type as the door track) that's fixed permanently to the top of the door. The wedge seals the top bar against the door edge as it contacts the inside floater bar, and the plastic glides smoothly. An A&P should be the one doing the work since it will probably modify a 337 approval. Lance

DSE, some of us do want the technical details, so please keep 'em coming. There are plenty of "dumbed down" forums on the net already if folks need that type of advice. It's great to have you here as a resource, although with some of the comments posted lately I wouldn't blame you at all for becoming frustrated at times. Lance

Agree with everyone else on the slots, holes are more secure. I've tried both, and slots work okay but they're not ideal. I also use the same method as Karen - pick one hole as your pivot if you're going to use the same mount for multiple angles. Also realize that the actual helmet is just one part of the equation when you're figuring out helmet camera angles. Body type, weight, suit type, flying style, and other stuff will all figure into it as you progress. Lance

That's the funniest thing I've seen in a long while!

A camera helmet is a piece of working gear. Get used to the idea that you're going to have some re-work as you figure out your system. That said, there's a lot of benefit in mocking up your helmet build ahead of time. Get a roll of gaffer tape and put everything where you think you want it. Since you're looking at filming RW, get down on your belly and see what you can get with the camera while lying on the floor. That's not perfect, but it will give you a starting point for adjustments. When you're satisfied with what you can get and the balance of your setup, start looking for snag points by pulling a line across it in various directions. Fix the snag points as much as possible. Make sure that your proposed setup doesn't interfere with the helmet cutaway. Now you're ready to get someone who knows camera helmets to help you check it over. Once they've helped with more adjustments, you're probably ready for the Dremel tool & drill, but don't be surprised if you have to tweak stuff to get it right and mess up your shiny new helmet. Use some of the left over gaffer tape and/or some "kewl" stickers to cover up your mistakes. Good luck. Lance

Sounds like a double tap to photo mode. Mine does this occasionally, but I notice it happens more just after opening. Two more quick double taps cycle you back to movie mode, which seems to work faster than powering down / back up for me. Lance

Thanks - it would also be interesting to know if the experience zone for serious accidents differs much from fatalities. Advances in medical technology (trauma centers, extension of 911 systems, EMT training) have made many serious accidents survivable today that could have been fatalities 20 years ago. Another factor to consider is the experience level within a specific discipline - maybe that's a better gauge of the real danger zone nowadays. If, through SIM recommendations and BSR's, we typically delay a jumper from beginning more hazardous disciplines (swooping, CRW, camera, etc.) until they have a few hundred jumps, that seems to bump the whole curve toward higher overall jump numbers / experience. Lance

One of the key concepts in that book is that a zone exists between x and y hours of experience where pilots are prone to fatal errors. It seems like there's probably a similar zone for jumpers too. Out of curiosity, does anyone have any thoughts on the low & high end of this "killing zone" range for skydiving jump numbers? Lance