Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Camera Flying

 

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

pilot-one  (D 30000)

Dec 23, 2010, 11:36 AM
Post #101 of 170 (1105 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
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..

Going back to the OP that's exactly how I observed the friend in question that was reamed by the S&TA. Not a single gear check but many many camera checks. Several of us were watching.
Not too long ago (month or so)at the same dropzone a newbie was observed walking to the plane with camera helmet in hand but no rig.........
I don't get it and of course, it's unspoken, but I am now seen as a camera nazi and no doubt a full blown dickhead...LOL
I'm the dickhead too that won't let you "fly headdown" with 150 jumps on my load either. If you insist then I'll just scratch off the load.


Premier DSE  (D 29060)
Moderator
Dec 23, 2010, 12:12 PM
Post #102 of 170 (1099 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilot-one] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
but I am now seen as a camera nazi and no doubt a full blown dickhead...LOL
I'm the dickhead too that won't let you "fly headdown" with 150 jumps on my load either. If you insist then I'll just scratch off the load.


From one "dickhead/nazi/holding back your radical bad-azz mad skillz" guy to another....thank you for caring.
I can think of two situations that would have possibly had different outcomes had I been more vocal.


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Dec 23, 2010, 1:02 PM
Post #103 of 170 (1091 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

I probably ripped (not literally) at least 6-10 cameras off heads while they were on the way to the plane trying to sneak on by. All know we adhere strictly to the 200 jump recommendation. I ended up in many an arguement as a result. All were go-pro's and one was a still camera. In one case, there was no hook knife, an RSL was being used, no cutaway system, and they gopro was mounted with hard metal screws. Seems like us "dickhead/nazi/holding back your radical bad-azz mad skillz" guys are in the minority nowadays.


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 23, 2010, 1:03 PM
Post #104 of 170 (1091 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
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.

So Bill, I showed yuo a few examples of this conduct AT YOUR DZ, and you refused to comment on it.

so answer this question.

Are you a S & TA at your DZ?

What do you plan on doing about the people breaking these procedures at your DZ?

I bet you will say nothing and will let is slide as long as you look like the good guy on the internet....


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Dec 23, 2010, 1:30 PM
Post #105 of 170 (1085 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Wings-n-Things] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
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???

Flying a camera is no distraction at all. No problem.Unsure

Sparky


April 6, 1988

PARACHUTIST'S DEATH RULED ACCIDENTAL

LOUISBURG (AP) - The death of an experienced parachutist who fell 10,500 feet without a parachute while he was filming another jump was accidental, Franklin County vestigators said Tuesday. "We have gathered enough information to declare it an accident," Sheriff Arthur Johnson said. Ivan Lester McGuire, 35, of Durham died Saturday after jumping from an airplane without a parachute, said Captain Ralph Brown of the Sheriff's Department. McGuire had made more than 800 jumps.McGuire, who was carrying a video camera mounted on his helmet, was filming a student and an instructor at Franklin County Sports Parachute Center when he jumped from the plane piloted by Mark Luman of Louisburg. Luman couldn't be found for comment and had no telephone listing, but Brown said the pilot "wasn't in any position to see what happened in the back of the plane." There was no answer at the parachute center. But Nancy Fayard was quoted Tuesday in the News and Observer of Raleigh [NC] as saying: "No one was aware that he got on the plane without a parachute. Of course no one knew or they would have stopped him." Brown said that there was no foul play and no indication that suicide was involved. But, he added, "A man who has jumped 800 times ought to remember his parachute." McGuire's body was found in woods about 1 1/2 miles from the airfield. The videotape showed McGuire jumping from the airplane and that the jump was going smoothly until the parachutes worn by the instructor and the student opened and McGuire hurtled below them. " It kind of appears he reached for his parachute and he didn't have one." Brown said. "You could see the instructor and the student falling on the video. But the release for his parachute is on the right hip, and when the right hand goes down, the left hand comes forward and it comes into camera view. "Then the pictures get to moving real fast because he's approaching the ground at 150 mph. The only thing the camera shows is the ground coming." Brown said blood samples will show whether McGuire had alcohol or drugs in his system and test results should be ready in about a week. Although an expert jumper, McGuire could have forgotten to put on his parachute because of fatigue or preoccupation with his video equipment, said Fayard, wife of club owner Paul Fayard-the instructor on McGuire's last jump. Nancy Fayard said McGuire worked third shift at Northern Telecom Inc., a manufacturer of telephone switching equipment, and usually left the club at noon to get to work. On Saturday, she said, he stayed until 2:30 to shoot the video. "He's a real perfectionist when it comes to his video photography, and he'd been working a lot on it," she said. "The best we can figure is he became so preoccupied with the video, and then being fatigued, that
his mind was on the video."
A Federal Aviation Administration investigator said he was checking to see if Luman knew whether McGuire was wearing a parachute when he
entered the airplane before the jump. Walter L. Rigsbee of the district office in Raleigh said FAA rules require that the pilot check to see that parachutists have on parachutes. Johnson said Tuesday the investigation showed the pilot thought McGuire was wearing a parachute. But Rigsbee said the video equipment may have been mistaken for a parachute. "These parachute clubs have safety programs," Rigsbee said. "They check these jumpers out depending on their experience."




(This post was edited by mjosparky on Dec 23, 2010, 1:32 PM)


Wings-n-Things  (D 12016)

Dec 23, 2010, 4:18 PM
Post #106 of 170 (1070 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
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???

Flying a camera is no distraction at all. No problem.Unsure

Sparky
Sparky 'ol pal, my only point is that jump number matters little. Anybody could potentially get so distracted they forget their rig. And for what it's worth, a simple pin check would have saved the jumper I mentioned. NOBODY is too cool for a pin check. Wink


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 23, 2010, 8:10 PM
Post #107 of 170 (1046 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ecnuob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

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

Me, for one.

>Exceptional my ass...

Well, a few of us actually do use our judgment.


jrjny  (A License)

Dec 23, 2010, 11:01 PM
Post #108 of 170 (1029 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

100 jumps to fly with students...200 to attach something to your helmet?

A DOZEN+ FATALITIES plus untold injuries per year related to 'high-performance' landings with ZERO recommendations in the SIM around jump #'s there, except for an ambiguous statement (no doubt crafted by practitioners of the 'art'):

http://www.uspa.org/...69/Default.aspx#611f

4. A canopy pilot should receive as much coaching as possible to reduce the risks under canopy; however, USPA warns all jumpers that any pilot who manipulates the canopy controls to induce additional speed prior to landings presents a greater hazard to himself or herself and others.

Come on - this is skydiving...not Newtonian mechanics. Every jump exposes you to small probabilities of catastrophic results that you have no control over and while you shouldn't knowingly push the envelope -- this argument is ridiculous. There should be a moderately standardized course to educate people - just like 'swoop coaching' that has no doubt benefited many a orthopedic surgeon and funeral home.

Enough hand-holding, egotism, babying and misdirection - people will do what they want and the market responds accordingly. If you want footage buy a camera and go tape the damn jump. Make sure it's on though Wink

Regards,

Jeff


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Dec 24, 2010, 9:16 AM
Post #109 of 170 (992 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

This thread and every other one involving jump numbers for flying camera's has become painful to keep up with. If we take every thread regarding the issue and combind them into one enormous thread, not one thing has changed in the arguement since post one day one. It seems we are going in one big painful circle. This reminds me of a Capital punishment arguement. people on bothsides set in their convictions. We can go back and forth on it but what is the use if nothing positive comes out of it. It is starting to seem like a collasal waste of time and energy.


Premier DSE  (D 29060)
Moderator
Dec 24, 2010, 10:52 AM
Post #110 of 170 (976 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jrjny] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
100 jumps to fly with students...200 to attach something to your helmet?

A DOZEN+ FATALITIES plus untold injuries per year related to 'high-performance' landings with ZERO recommendations in the SIM around jump #'s there, except for an ambiguous statement (no doubt crafted by practitioners of the 'art'):

http://www.uspa.org/...69/Default.aspx#611f

4. A canopy pilot should receive as much coaching as possible to reduce the risks under canopy; however, USPA warns all jumpers that any pilot who manipulates the canopy controls to induce additional speed prior to landings presents a greater hazard to himself or herself and others.

Come on - this is skydiving...not Newtonian mechanics. Every jump exposes you to small probabilities of catastrophic results that you have no control over and while you shouldn't knowingly push the envelope -- this argument is ridiculous. There should be a moderately standardized course to educate people - just like 'swoop coaching' that has no doubt benefited many a orthopedic surgeon and funeral home.

Enough hand-holding, egotism, babying and misdirection - people will do what they want and the market responds accordingly. If you want footage buy a camera and go tape the damn jump. Make sure it's on though Wink

Regards,

Jeff

As unfortunate as it is, you're right.
USPA should be more actively seeking means of reducing fatalities and serious injuries due to small canopies and rapid downsizing. Scandinavian countries have a program worth examining as a potential model. However...one "wrong" doesn't make for another right, right?


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Dec 24, 2010, 11:43 AM
Post #111 of 170 (966 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

We agree on this.
USPA should be doing more to EDUCATE aspiring camera-flyers.
Every few years, PARACHUTIST Magazine publishes an article or three about "how to fly a camera," but last year's magazines are lost on this year's new crop of skydivers.
Maybe this year's crop of new skydivers needs something online, on USPA's website ... oh! silly me! It would have to be Facebook or Twitter or this second's fashion in social networking websites. The beauty of social networking websites is that they allow young jumpers to learn from each other??????
Hah!
Hah!

Oh!
Just ignore a grumpy old bastard like me.
Hah!
Hah!


jrjny  (A License)

Dec 24, 2010, 12:29 PM
Post #112 of 170 (961 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
As unfortunate as it is, you're right.
USPA should be more actively seeking means of reducing fatalities and serious injuries due to small canopies and rapid downsizing. Scandinavian countries have a program worth examining as a potential model. However...one "wrong" doesn't make for another right, right?

In absolute terms no, but life is all about contrast - in part that's why we participate in a sport that has ZERO pragmatic value (let's be honest Cool ). Some people want to stand out, some want self overcoming, some adrenaline, some camaraderie, some money lol.

So, in what I believe is a loosely and very imperfectly governed system, being overly focused on one item to the detriment of another - especially if both are in the name of greater safety and the sport's REPUTATION/approachability (eg, Google the name of some dropzone and you'll see 'fatality' appended to the search term) = kinda silly.

I don't have thousands of jumps nor am I able to do fancy free flying or swooping, but I do realize before every jump regardless of whether I have a camera:

>check my gear 3x before boarding,
>on the plane +
>3rd party pin check plus EP review before exiting not to mention,
>before driving to the DZ.

I've drilled the notion of altitude awareness into my head so many times, that I EXPECT I will continue checking my altimeter and being heads up regardless of how experienced/laid back I may become. If I fail at this I have 2 audibles from 2 different manufacturers to further minimize an already small probability (though still non-zero). If ALL else fails I have a brand new cypress which while does not guarantee anything, keeps me ever further from annihilation.

That said, returning to small probabilities - I may die or get maimed unexpectedly for a situation I could have never expected. That's life and I do NOT believe this basic concept is drilled into people's heads, hence the recurring theme of experienced jumpers smashing into the ground, over and over and over again. I truly wonder if I will get the point mentally where I need to learn high performance landings to still enjoy the sport:

Quote:
USPA warns all jumpers that any pilot who manipulates the canopy controls to induce additional speed prior to landings presents a greater hazard to himself or herself and others.

- I can't comment because I'm not there yet or even close but it gives pause for thought.

Chase 2 rabbits and catch none....

Jeff
Attachments: google search.jpg (88.8 KB)


jrjny  (A License)

Dec 24, 2010, 12:36 PM
Post #113 of 170 (958 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jrjny] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

Humor me - imagine a newb walks into a dropzone and says, "hey there were 40 fatalities in the US last year, why should I make a jump at all?"

Would you say, "don't worry most of them had hundreds or thousands of jumps and knew what they were doing" - you'll be fine. Shocked

WTF


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Dec 25, 2010, 2:03 AM
Post #114 of 170 (914 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
We agree on this.
USPA should be doing more to EDUCATE aspiring camera-flyers.
Every few years, PARACHUTIST Magazine publishes an article or three about "how to fly a camera," but last year's magazines are lost on this year's new crop of skydivers.
Maybe this year's crop of new skydivers needs something online, on USPA's website ... oh! silly me! It would have to be Facebook or Twitter or this second's fashion in social networking websites. The beauty of social networking websites is that they allow young jumpers to learn from each other??????
Hah!
Hah!

Oh!
Just ignore a grumpy old bastard like me.
Hah!
Hah!

Rob,

You can't teach common sense and attitude. It must come from within.

Sparky


diablopilot  (D License)

Dec 25, 2010, 4:55 AM
Post #115 of 170 (908 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
USPA should be doing more to EDUCATE aspiring camera-flyers.

Disagree. It is not the USPA's role to train skydivers, whether new or experienced.


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 25, 2010, 2:59 PM
Post #116 of 170 (871 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This thread and every other one involving jump numbers for flying camera's has become painful to keep up with. If we take every thread regarding the issue and combind them into one enormous thread, not one thing has changed in the arguement since post one day one.

This is because of the inability of those to acept the differences in different places and simply (mistakingly) assume that their system is the best, and no alternative could ever be more acceptable.

There has been plenty to learn.

Remember, much more people read here than that post here, and the ridicule from many of the post whores, is purposly placed by the bigots to avoid the alternative opinions coming out and discrediting their own.

This is common throughout society.

Aside from that, there is plenty to learn here and these forums are not just for you and me, they are for everybody and that will always ensure a difference of opinion.

How people ingest and respond to those differences, is entirely up to themselves.


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 25, 2010, 3:02 PM)


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Dec 25, 2010, 8:02 PM
Post #117 of 170 (836 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

5 pages later:

Different country's have different requirements to jump with a camera.

All of them are not the same.

Therefore, whether it is 50, 100, or 200 people will always be argueing to increase or decrease.

USPA must make the recommendation, taking into consideration the safety of the majority.

What more can I get from re-hashing.

Now, if you want to make a case for 50, 100, or 200, or 1000. Bring forth facts, study's, to give your thought process some clout.

You have not shown me that if the recommendation was 100 there would be no signifigant difference from the statistics if it were 200.


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 25, 2010, 8:38 PM
Post #118 of 170 (831 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You have not shown me that if the recommendation was 100 there would be no signifigant difference from the statistics if it were 200.

If not, then I needn't bother. The information is there.


PiLFy  (A License)

Dec 26, 2010, 6:52 AM
Post #119 of 170 (809 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

"This thread and every other one involving jump numbers for flying camera's....is starting to seem like a collasal waste of time and energy."

Yep...+1


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Dec 26, 2010, 7:45 AM
Post #120 of 170 (796 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

Rhys,

I am going to publicly disagree with you, because you have not grasped a recurring theme in my posts - whether my posts be about tandems or rigging or camera-jumping.
My recurring theme is: USPA, CSPA, APF, BPA, etc. all learned a lesson the hard/bloody way, so why do we need to re-learn that lesson.

When training new tandem instructors, I deliberately blur the distinction between accidents that occurred with Strong gear and accidents that occurred with Vector gear.

When training new Canadian Rigger As, I tell them that FARs may not be LAW in Canada, but they are considered "best business practice." Ignore a FAR and you stand alone in a Canadian court.

Rob Warner
Strong Tandem Examiner
FAA Master Rigger
CSPA Rigger Examiner
600 jumps with Handy-Cam


rhys  (D 95)

Dec 26, 2010, 2:41 PM
Post #121 of 170 (778 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
When training new tandem instructors, I deliberately blur the distinction between accidents that occurred with Strong gear and accidents that occurred with Vector gear.

When training new Canadian Rigger As, I tell them that FARs may not be LAW in Canada, but they are considered "best business practice." Ignore a FAR and you stand alone in a Canadian court.

Cool, we will agree to disagree, you will find that many, not only myself, wish to avoid the unecessary beaurocracy that is prevalent in the United States.

Common sense out the window and status quo un challenged... Not where I want to be thank you.

And no matter how much you think their way is the best way, it is not the rules in many countries and to say that people should adhere to rules that are not specific to them IMHO is lunacy.

I don't expect you would recieve to well me coming into one of your tandem exams and saying that the participants should wait for another few hundred jumps, so they have at least 1000 before proceeding because that has worked well for us...

I cannot see any difference.

But we have agreed to disagree and we are allowed to do that.

have a nice day.


(This post was edited by rhys on Dec 26, 2010, 5:15 PM)


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Dec 26, 2010, 4:56 PM
Post #122 of 170 (762 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I don't expect you would recieve to well me coming into one of your tandem exams and saying that the participants should wait for another few hundred jumps, so they have at least 1000 before proceeding because that has worked well for us...

I dunno, Rhys. Not being a TI, I have no dog in that training hunt but from a strictly safety POV, I would find it hard to argue that point.

I'm of the better-safe-than-sorry school of thought.

Are you going to now ask just how many jumps would get the green light? Quantity is not a valid benchmark for that.

What's not being considered right now, or at least is not getting enough emphasis IMO, is the important stuff, in my book...mentality, attitude and willingness to play within the rules. The problem with all that is that we can test skills, but how do you test, and quantify, the rest of it?

So...we're stuck with jump numbers for now.
Unsure


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Dec 28, 2010, 11:15 AM
Post #123 of 170 (679 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

Not sure if I agree with Rhys - about whether aspiring TIs should make 1,000 before earning the rating???
It would be nice - from a safety perspective - however, we run into a compromise.
The compromise is between youthful exuberance and knowledge.
In Canada, we try to get young skydivers to become coaches while they are still young and enthusiastic (say 100 jumps) ... while they still have the enthusiasm to pass on lots of knowledge to young jumpers.

Since few recreational skydivers reach 1,000 jumps, I doubt if that is a reasonable pre-level for TIs. By 1,000 jumps, many have burnt out and moved on to other sports. By 1,000 jumps, some "know it all" and are impossible to retrain as effective TIs.

But I have to agree with the poster below Rhys that the true measure is a list of skills. No matter how many thousands of jups they make, many skydivers will perpetually remain to self-centered and too immature to ever make effective TIs.
I have already twice refused to train a local videographer to become a TI, something about him injuring himself two springs in a row. I am afraid to train him to become a TI for fear that he will injure a student.

So we are stuck in a compromise between rising experience and decreasing enthusiasm, when we decide who to rain as TIs.


Fast  (D 28237)

Dec 29, 2010, 8:59 AM
Post #124 of 170 (628 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhys] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm so sick of hearing about this country or that country.

I don't care about any of that. I think, 50 jumps is too few to be jumping camera. I think 100 is too few jumps to be coaching another skydiver. At about 200 jumps I'm comfortable with someone introducing one new thing.

Pick something: coaching, wingsuits, cameras, swooping, accuracy, freeflying... whatever it is that might trip your trigger and start to learn about that. Get a grasp on what is going on, get some coaching on the subject, learn about it. Once you have a basic grasp on that subject only then should you start to add something else.

I'm sick of "I want everything now." There are going to be diamonds in the rough that stand out, but it really is clear when you find one of them. I have seen it. In 7 years of skydiving I have seen only one person that was exceptionally better than everyone else. Only 1 out of all the students including myself that my dropzone has trained.


Scrumpot  (D License)

Dec 29, 2010, 11:48 AM
Post #125 of 170 (610 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Fast] Camera Flying [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There are going to be diamonds in the rough that stand out, but it really is clear when you find one of them.

And here's the thing... Those WILL get to 200 jumps (or whatever #, for whatever discipline you are using) soon / "quick" enough. I really don't see WHAT THE BIG DEAL (i.e. RUSH/HURRY) IS. Seriously. Nobody is holding any of these "mad skillz" set back. Mad

I mean, what's the deal? Gotta hurry up and get that camera (or wingsuit, or swoop, or whatever) on RIGHT NOW no matter what?? - Gotta hurry up before you get to jump #199 right - - - after all, you may even just have flat out QUIT and moved on by then. Right? This sh** gets old otherwise, right - after (or any longer than) jump #100 easily. 150 at the latest.

Better get ALL OF IT out that you can NOW - before you're ready to just hang it up and move on anyway. Crazy


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)