Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Camera Flying

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All

Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Dec 19, 2010, 6:25 PM
Post #76 of 170 (1130 views)
Shortcut
Re: [TiaDanger] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

~~There are no "official wingsuit instructors. There used to be the Birdman program (defunct when the manufacturer went out of business) and the Phoenix-fly Coach program.
These are manufacturer programs, not "official" USPA or other organizational programs. We've tried to get USPA to recognize the value behind such a program. And yes...the rapid advancement of students in a structured wingsuit program has been fairly obvious.

~~Elsinore has had a structured camera coach program for years. Norman Kent has a structured program as well. There are probably others. However, these are individual courses and not "official" by USPA endorsement.

If USPA could be convinced of the value of an advanced coach rating, then wingsuit instruction and camera training programs would certainly fall under that category. I can think of a double-dozen camera pros that would help develop a syllabus.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 20, 2010, 6:04 AM
Post #77 of 170 (1096 views)
Shortcut
Re: [julio_gyn] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

>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,

1) There's no 'rules' - it's a guideline, not a rule.

2) And they are still jumper dependent. If a jumper is exceptional, heads up, has done all the exits, can control their body, have a wide fall rate range etc. they may well be able to start doing camera at 200 jumps. Some people may take longer.

That's how it works now. The only problem is that some jumpers want to start RIGHT NOW and they don't understand the distractions of camera. So they start thinking that the 200 jump rule is the maximum, not the minimum. "Hey, if anyone can jump a camera at 200 jumps, I can start at 100, because I'm not just anyone!"

>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????

Exactly, and that's why the wingsuit guidelines are 200 jumps ONLY if the person is an exceptional tracker, has compatible gear, is very heads up etc. 500 jumps is a better number for your 'average' jumper.


julio_gyn  (A 705)

Dec 20, 2010, 12:23 PM
Post #78 of 170 (1051 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

I would love to have mad skilz, to go fly wingsuit with 50 jumps... I'm a good flier (instructors word) but in my opinion I'm not that good and will take a bit longer to fly something else than my rw jumpwuit.


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 21, 2010, 11:29 PM
Post #79 of 170 (970 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
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.

Because that is what I am used to...

My opinion may be different to yours, and we are allowed to disagree, but the rules are the rules.


In reply to:
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.

Because that is what I am used to...

My opinion may be different to yours, and we are allowed to disagree, but the rules are the rules.

In reply to:
Why is 1000 better than 500, but 200 not better than 100????

Because that is what I am used to...

My opinion may be different to yours, and we are allowed to disagree, but the rules are the rules.

Do you see a pattern froming here?


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 21, 2010, 11:33 PM
Post #80 of 170 (967 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
1) There's no 'rules' - it's a guideline, not a rule.

Under the USPA maybe, In the other countries such as the ones I have pointed out earlier in this thread, are rules.

I posted those rules.

Did you read them? They are from the operational regulations, which are rules.

In reply to:
2) And they are still jumper dependent. If a jumper is exceptional, heads up, has done all the exits, can control their body, have a wide fall rate range etc. and are in New Zealand, Australia, South Africa or Canada they may well be able to start doing camera at 100 jumps. Some people may take longer. USPA and BPA jumpers will have to wait untill they have 200

There, fixed ot for yaWink

In reply to:
Exactly, and that's why the wingsuit guidelines are 200 jumps ONLY if the person is an exceptional tracker, has compatible gear, is very heads up etc. 500 jumps is a better number for your 'average' jumper.

These are the rules for APF jumpers for jumping a wingsuit, they are not ambiguous reccomendations, they are indeed rules.

Interesting how it is different in different places isn't it. It is important that jumpers from different locations are aware of the rules or recommendations that pertain to them.


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 21, 2010, 11:48 PM)


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Dec 22, 2010, 7:50 AM
Post #81 of 170 (916 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

But there are other rules from other other sources you choose to ignore, why?

Rules are Rules, right?

Matt


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 22, 2010, 11:49 AM
Post #82 of 170 (877 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
But there are other rules from other other sources you choose to ignore, why?

Rules are Rules, right?

Matt

Which rules...?

You'll have to be more concise.

Manufacturer recommendations are not rules, unless the operational regulations you are subject to specify so.

That is all I can imagine you are talking about.

Would you care to clarify, or would you rather remain ambiguous?


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Dec 22, 2010, 12:23 PM
Post #83 of 170 (866 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
But there are other rules from other other sources you choose to ignore, why?

Rules are Rules, right?

Matt

Which rules...?

You'll have to be more concise.

Manufacturer recommendations are not rules, unless the operational regulations you are subject to specify so.

That is all I can imagine you are talking about.

Would you care to clarify, or would you rather remain ambiguous?

No your right on it, except, the Manufacturers Rules are Rules.

You use a SIGMA, and the Manufacturer has stated over and over again, how to use its systems, you have said "No" several times now.

You think 1000 jumps for a Tandem Rating is better than 500. Yet you think 50 jumps enough for a camera.

Then you use a line like "Rules are Rules".

Your a confusing person to understand.

Matt


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 22, 2010, 12:44 PM
Post #84 of 170 (862 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
No your right on it, except, the Manufacturers Rules are Rules...

...In the country of manufacture, or if the operations regulations of the said country specifies so,

Those same manufacturers work hand over feet to get the lucarative contracts to supply containers to the companies that do the 20,000 plus tandems a year. The manufacturers also know those comapanies use precision reserves, Icarus or hop main canopies, do backflips, handicam...

You are talking about America again.

We are not subject to the same rules you are...


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 22, 2010, 12:46 PM)


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Dec 22, 2010, 12:50 PM
Post #85 of 170 (856 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

I was talking the rules from the manufacturer and was not aware of any exception for other countries other than the under age exception.

If your stating the manufacturer says it is OK to skip handle checks cause you use Handy cam OK. They told me "No" though.

BUT if your under standing of the rules as they apply from the manufacturer, in your location, is better than mine, I then stand corrected.

Matt


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 22, 2010, 12:57 PM
Post #86 of 170 (853 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If your stating the manufacturer says it is OK to skip handle checks cause you use Handy cam OK. They told me "No" though.

They will never tell you it is OK to skip handle checks, jump camera with a tandem with less than 500 jumps, do backflips, however they will also not refuse to sell equipment to companies they know ( good old youtube) do these very things, because that comapany may order 20 harnesses and containers every 2 years while failing to purchase the reserves and mains that supposedly go with them.


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 22, 2010, 12:59 PM)


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Dec 22, 2010, 1:10 PM
Post #87 of 170 (849 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If your stating the manufacturer says it is OK to skip handle checks cause you use Handy cam OK. They told me "No" though.

They will never tell you it is OK to skip handle checks, jump camera with a tandem with less than 500 jumps, do backflips, however they will also not refuse to sell equipment to companies they know ( good old youtube) do these very things, because that comapany may order 20 harnesses and containers every 2 years while failing to purchase the reserves and mains that supposedly go with them.

Fair enough.

But if they did step up and pull your Manufacturers rating what would that then do?

In the US, the agreement is both USPA and the Manufacturer will honor the others disciplinary action. I.E. UPT pulls a rating USPA'a goes too.

Matt


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 22, 2010, 1:18 PM
Post #88 of 170 (845 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Fair enough.

But if they did step up and pull your Manufacturers rating what would that then do?

Nothing, unless I intend on doing tandems in the USA again.

There is no need for a manufacturers rating here or anywhere other than the USA or anywhere that has cloned their 'rules' off the USPA.

We have our own licencing and ratings system.

NZ is fucked up right now with 3 different sets of rules/licensing organisations but that is being ironed out over the next couple of years.


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 22, 2010, 1:21 PM)


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Dec 22, 2010, 3:14 PM
Post #89 of 170 (822 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

So in NZ none of the Manufacturers issue ratings and are not "In Partnership" with the three governing bodies?

Well then, I now understand, you don't have to deal with any of our issues, so you see them as "silly" or "over reactive".

Matt


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 22, 2010, 8:55 PM
Post #90 of 170 (782 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

>They will never tell you it is OK to skip handle checks . . .

Yet you have decided it's OK. Perhaps someday people in the US will know better than the gear manufacturers how to operate their equipment. Until then, we'll have to live in the shadow of people arrogant enough to ignore the manufacturers in favor of their own opinions. C'est la vie.


ecnuob  (A License)

Dec 23, 2010, 2:57 AM
Post #91 of 170 (758 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

and that readme only covers the USPA, which like other things US related only cover things the lawyers think will make them money. Look at the recomendations of a few other countries... Ive seen as low as 50... Frankly, you have already decide to risk YOUR life by hurling it at the earth at 120mph, the chance that a camera is going to lead to you taking someone else out is small and you should put one on your head whenever you feel like it.

And there is a differnce between "camera flying" and video logging.


ecnuob  (A License)

Dec 23, 2010, 3:01 AM
Post #92 of 170 (757 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>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,

1) There's no 'rules' - it's a guideline, not a rule.

2) And they are still jumper dependent. If a jumper is exceptional, heads up, has done all the exits, can control their body, have a wide fall rate range etc. they may well be able to start doing camera at 200 jumps. Some people may take longer.

That's how it works now. The only problem is that some jumpers want to start RIGHT NOW and they don't understand the distractions of camera. So they start thinking that the 200 jump rule is the maximum, not the minimum. "Hey, if anyone can jump a camera at 200 jumps, I can start at 100, because I'm not just anyone!"

>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????

Exactly, and that's why the wingsuit guidelines are 200 jumps ONLY if the person is an exceptional tracker, has compatible gear, is very heads up etc. 500 jumps is a better number for your 'average' jumper.


So who has said no to a paying student with 200 jumps that wants to go wingsuiting? Exceptional my ass...


monkycndo  (D License)

Dec 23, 2010, 4:44 AM
Post #93 of 170 (746 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ecnuob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

So who has said no to a paying student with 200 jumps that wants to go wingsuiting?

That would be me. Have had several students with over 200 jumps but not within the 18 months. I've seen what can happen when you disregard standards. It's best to learn from others mistakes.


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Dec 23, 2010, 6:18 AM
Post #94 of 170 (733 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ecnuob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
and that readme only covers the USPA, which like other things US related only cover things the lawyers think will make them money. Look at the recomendations of a few other countries... Ive seen as low as 50... Frankly, you have already decide to risk YOUR life by hurling it at the earth at 120mph, the chance that a camera is going to lead to you taking someone else out is small and you should put one on your head whenever you feel like it.

One line of the "Read Me" covers only the USPA and the Read Me was edited to mention other countries. The other 25-plus points are relevant to everyone. By your statement, are you saying that we let students jump with cameras, with wingsuits, skyboards, freefly tubes, inflatables regardless of jump numbers?

In reply to:
And there is a differnce between "camera flying" and video logging.

Would you explain the difference?


(This post was edited by DSE on Dec 23, 2010, 8:05 AM)


stratostar  (Student)

Dec 23, 2010, 6:35 AM
Post #95 of 170 (729 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ecnuob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

With all of your one year of wisdom in the sport you might want to rethink your statement.

Quote:
the chance that a camera is going to lead to you taking someone else out is small

http://www.dropzone.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;


Wings-n-Things  (D 12016)

Dec 23, 2010, 6:42 AM
Post #96 of 170 (727 views)
Shortcut
Re: [TiaDanger] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
... If there were camera instruction courses, it gives newbies like me a disciplined path to becoming a safe camera flyer....

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.

Not to mention a comprehensive class on what kind of video equipment is out there, what kind of helmets, how to rig the cameras on the helmets, the various cutaway systems and the advantages/disadvantages of the various brands and such.

Anybody remember that guy in Florida about 20 years ago who was so distracted by his camera equipment, he forgot to put on his parachute?
I wonder how many jumps he had???

The tiny cameras available today, combined with camera ready helmets make camera flying a much easier & safer prospect than it used to be. So much so that a lot of the bickering on this thread is pretty silly IMHO.

Forget about an individuals jump numbers and focus on establishing a somewhat standardized training program and go from there. Wink


Scrumpot  (D License)

Dec 23, 2010, 7:15 AM
Post #97 of 170 (722 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ecnuob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
...you should put one on your head whenever you feel like it.

And there is a differnce between "camera flying" and video logging.

And the first time you are (as in my 1st hand experience/witnessed case - luckily only nearly) TAKEN OUT by just such a person, who was only using it "to log his own jump" - (supposedly) "didn't care about the quality" of the video, was ONLY for his strictly 1st person, POV "logging" - you will change your newby tune too.

Please. Sheesh. NOBODY IS TRYING TO HOLD YOU (or anyone) BACK! ALL WE ARE SAYING IS (please. ...please, please, please, please, *PLEASE*) - JUST GET THE MOST VERY BASIC (basics!) EXPERIENCE IN PLACE AND UNDER YOUR BELTS 1st. Really - that's all. Yes - in some cases, like mine (ours) as illustrated above sake, but really and truly for YOURS (and yes, your own "good") as well.

"Whenever you feel like it", no matter what - is just such an asinine, and so much of a completely selfish statement (all rules and reccomendation #'s debates even aside) - that I would also absolutely refuse to jump, or even have on my jumps anyone making any such statement - if they stated that in my presence on the DZ. REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER THEIR JUMP #'s EXPERIENCE. If they truly meant that.

FWIW.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Dec 23, 2010, 9:56 AM
Post #98 of 170 (690 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
With all of your one year of wisdom in the sport you might want to rethink your statement.

Quote:
the chance that a camera is going to lead to you taking someone else out is small

http://www.dropzone.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

I have been almost run into a few times by people flying cameras under canopy. If you as a new jumper want to jump camera so badly, stay the f*** away from anybody else, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Dec 23, 2010, 9:58 AM
Post #99 of 170 (688 views)
Shortcut
Re: [monkycndo] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

So who has said no to a paying student with 200 jumps that wants to go wingsuiting?

That would be me. Have had several students with over 200 jumps but not within the 18 months. I've seen what can happen when you disregard standards. It's best to learn from others mistakes.

Me too a few times. For not being current/heads-up enough, and once for refusing to jump a sensible canopy.


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Dec 23, 2010, 10:11 AM
Post #100 of 170 (683 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

or the all famous check you camera 100 times on the way up and make sure it is on, and forget to even do one gear check. Oh that is so secondary to a good vid..


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)