Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
2 out roof landing

 

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

LDiCosimo  (B License)

Nov 11, 2011, 2:04 AM
Post #76 of 147 (1389 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

Number of jumpers killed by GoPros and Contours combined: ZERO!

Number of AAD activations due to low/no pulls: Enough to prove their worth!

Number of AAD activations due to presence of GoPro or Contour without low/no pull: ZERO!

http://www.dropzone.com/...apsed;guest=82160489

Read through this please. The point is, it's not the size of the camera that is a concern, rather the distraction/varables whatever one wants to call it.

The two out incident we see here basically disproves your argument. The jumper flipped over and filmed the others opening then went way low. I don't buy that "learning to backfly" excuse.


MariusM

Nov 11, 2011, 2:30 AM
Post #77 of 147 (1369 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
USPA recommendation not a rule! If there were people with 100 jumps with massive commercial set-ups on their heads then I'd see the point, as it seems most people do. That's not the problem. The problem is that the experienced jumpers have taken a recommendation and turned it into a rule to harass and harangue newer jumpers over to prevent them from using small format cameras, even though there's no definitive evidence that it's unsafe.

Should there be some law to forbid the use small format cameras on motorcycles, mountain bikes, snowskis, zip lines, and wind tunnels? Why is it that it's the small format camera that suddenly makes skydiving dangerous?

You, sir, are good in trolling on Internet forums. Almost as good as S..., Sa..., San... Well, as One Who Must Not Be Named. Have strong opinions on everything, starting from cases against Cypress and finishing with GoPro on lowbies helemt. I salute you!


d100965  (D 100965)

Nov 11, 2011, 4:21 AM
Post #78 of 147 (1330 views)
Shortcut
Re: [LDiCosimo] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

ahh, it's turned into another debate on the use of cameras by newbies.....

Can we get back to flaming the guy in the video for being such a dick.

The camera is most certainly a factor in this whole event, but I think that the biggest problem was more to do with the guy himself.
The argument this presents is really more a case of "is skydiving really for him?" and "how should he be punished?"

We all fuck up, but how much do you have to get wrong before you question whether or not you really should be Skydiving at all.
A telling off for that entire cluster fuck really isn't enough. Some long time away from the sport to really reflect and understand ones actions would be most warranted.
Despite a stern telling off and being spoken to by his instructors, this guy is probably straight back up in the air with his camera and his awesome skills.
[Sarcasm on] Oh, he's very sorry, he's promised that he'll ensure the camera won't distract him again. And he's now got an audible so he won't be low again. [Sarcasm off]
In the old days before political correctness and worrying about peoples feelings, his actions would have warranted some severe reprisals.


(This post was edited by d100965 on Nov 11, 2011, 8:36 AM)


manseman  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 7:17 AM
Post #79 of 147 (1278 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dzhuravkov] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Lessons learned: pull higher, be more altitude aware, and get an audible...
Another reflection: Did you understand how low you were when you finally deployed and why didn't you deploy your reserve instead of your main?


airtwardo  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 8:26 AM
Post #80 of 147 (1231 views)
Shortcut
Re: [manseman] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Lessons learned: pull higher, be more altitude aware, and get an audible...
Another reflection: Did you understand how low you were when you finally deployed and why didn't you deploy your reserve instead of your main?


THAT is the question.

I believe he 'knew' how low because the video shows an altimeter check, probably didn't 'understand' how low because of the standard pulling of the main.

There are quite possibly quite a few things this jumper doesn't understand clearly.

With just a fraction of a second more delay and he would have had both canopies fighting for clean air over his head, that often doesn't turn out well.


davelepka  (D 21448)

Nov 11, 2011, 8:55 AM
Post #81 of 147 (1218 views)
Shortcut
Re: [danielcroft] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Denis has had a talking to by instructors and senior jumpers at the ranch and I'm sure will learn from this

It seems not as he continues to downplay the role of the camera, and intends to keep jumping it.

Which brings me to my next point, am I to understand that the Ranch permits the use of cameras for jumpers with less than 200 jumps? I know it's not a BSR, but it's a reccomendation, and for the USPA to get off it's ass and do anything means it has some merit (and probably should have been done a year ago).

Which brings me to my next point, am I to understand that the Ranch, in the wake of this incident with this jumper, will continue to allow him to jump a camera with under 200 jumps?

I've already chimed in with the mistakes made by the jumper in question, so now I'll add the Ranch to the party. Allowing a jumper with less than 200 jumps to jump a camera is a risk, and this case proves that. Beyond that, to not end the 'debrief' of this jump with the words, 'You're not jumping a camera at this DZ until you have over 200 jumps', is beyond stupid. The only 'argument' against the 200 jump min for jumping cameras is that some jumpers are ready before then, and while that may be true (with the catch being that there's no way to know beforehand), this jumper has proven to not be one of the 'chosen few' who can deal with a camera before 200 jumps, and should not be allowed to continue jumping one.

Who the hell is in charge at the Ranch these days?


sacex250

Nov 11, 2011, 9:15 AM
Post #82 of 147 (1203 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Which brings me to my next point, am I to understand that the Ranch permits the use of cameras for jumpers with less than 200 jumps? I know it's not a BSR, but it's a reccomendation, and for the USPA to get off it's ass and do anything means it has some merit (and probably should have been done a year ago).
Dave, the USPA recommendation is not 200 jumps. The recommendation is for the jumper to have a C-License, granted, the minimum number of jumps for a C-License is 200, but it's still two distinctly separate standards.

Why does it matter? A C-License is not automatically issued for having 200 jumps. A C-License is a specific level of demonstrated competence and it's not unreasonable to expect that many jumpers achieve it prior to their 200th jump..


manseman  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 9:25 AM
Post #83 of 147 (1185 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Why does it matter? A C-License is not automatically issued for having 200 jumps. A C-License is a specific level of demonstrated competence and it's not unreasonable to expect that many jumpers achieve it prior to their 200th jump..
What? If the recommendation is a C-license and one of the C-license requirements is having made 200 jumps it's quite amazing how you can conclude that the recommendation doesn't have anything to do with jump numbers.


davelepka  (D 21448)

Nov 11, 2011, 9:28 AM
Post #84 of 147 (1181 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
A C-License is not automatically issued for having 200 jumps. A C-License is a specific level of demonstrated competence and it's not unreasonable to expect that many jumpers achieve it prior to their 200th jump..

That might be so, and your argument isn't going to help the idea that people think you're a lawyer.

However, the C license is both a demonstrated level of competence AND experience. I'll let the SIM do the talking here -

C License

3. Persons holding a USPA C license are able to exercise all privileges of a B-license holder, are eligible for the USPA Instructor rating (except USPA Tandem Instructor), participate in certain demonstration jumps, may ride as passenger on USPA Tandem Instructor training and rating renewal jumps, and must have--

a. met all current requirements for or hold a USPA B license

b. completed 200 jumps, including accumulating at least 60 minutes of controlled freefall time

c. landed within two meters of target center on 25 jumps

d. aerial performance requirements, either:

(1) during freefall, perform in sequence within 18 seconds-a backloop, front loop, left 360-degree turn, right 360-degree turn, right barrel roll and left barrel roll

(2) completed at least two points on an 8-way or larger random skydive

e. passed a written exam conducted by a current USPA I/E, S&TA, or USPA Board member.


- I'll direct the courts attention to item 'b' on the list, and it clearly states that a jumper must have completed 200 jumps totaling not less than 60 mintues of freefall time to qualify for a C license.

No 200 jumps means no licesnse, which means a jumper with less than 200 jumps is below the reccomended number of jumps the USPA put forth for jumping cameras.

You said it yourself, the reccomendation is to have a C license, not to have skills equivilant to a C license. You suggested that I overstated the reccomendation by calling it 200 jumps, and not the C license, when in actuality I understated it by only calling it 200 jumps. The truth, it seems, is that you need 200 AND the C license to meet the USPA requirement (with the 200 jumps just being there due to it's requirement for earning a C license).


virgin-burner

Nov 11, 2011, 9:44 AM
Post #85 of 147 (1164 views)
Shortcut
Re: [d100965] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
ahh, it's turned into another debate on the use of cameras by newbies.....

Can we get back to flaming the guy in the video for being such a dick.

it all turns into a shit-discussion and flame-fest, took quite a while in this case..

hey, it's dorkzone after all.. Wink


d100965  (D 100965)

Nov 11, 2011, 10:10 AM
Post #86 of 147 (1148 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

Ah VB, as I was saying there was a time before political correctness and having to worry about people's feelings. So with that in mind I will add that it's nice we are flaming someone else this time instead of you.
Tongue
200 jumps, C license and not being a complete fuckwit is required before jumping with camera. Sorted Wink


virgin-burner

Nov 11, 2011, 12:41 PM
Post #87 of 147 (1088 views)
Shortcut
Re: [d100965] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Ah VB, as I was saying there was a time before political correctness and having to worry about people's feelings. So with that in mind I will add that it's nice we are flaming someone else this time instead of you.

thanks, and it just happens to be my sort of feelings on the subject, too! Laugh


Premier Remster  (C License)

Nov 11, 2011, 1:42 PM
Post #88 of 147 (1061 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Who the hell is in charge at the Ranch these days?

Sounds like you haven't been to the Ranch before. Unless they've changed, there are no rules at the Ranch (but quite a bit of positive "peer pressure" when adequate).


sacex250

Nov 11, 2011, 3:04 PM
Post #89 of 147 (1029 views)
Shortcut
Re: [manseman] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Why does it matter? A C-License is not automatically issued for having 200 jumps. A C-License is a specific level of demonstrated competence and it's not unreasonable to expect that many jumpers achieve it prior to their 200th jump..
What? If the recommendation is a C-license and one of the C-license requirements is having made 200 jumps it's quite amazing how you can conclude that the recommendation doesn't have anything to do with jump numbers.
Would it make sense to you if I said that the USPA recommendation for jumping with a camera was 60 minutes of freefall time?

Having two hundred jumps is not the same thing as having a C-License.


DaVinciflies

Nov 11, 2011, 3:06 PM
Post #90 of 147 (1022 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

Having two hundred jumps is not the same thing as having a C-License.

But having 200 jumps is the lesser of the two, so by implication the USPA recommends at least 200 jumps to jump with a camera.


(This post was edited by DaVinciflies on Nov 11, 2011, 3:07 PM)


manseman  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 3:14 PM
Post #91 of 147 (1013 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Would it make sense to you if I said that the USPA recommendation for jumping with a camera was 60 minutes of freefall time?
It sure would make a whole lot more sense than suggesting that freefall time and jump numbers don't have anything to do with the experience needed to jump with a camera. I don't really understand what, if any, point you are trying to make but try applying some common sense.


Scrumpot  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 3:28 PM
Post #92 of 147 (1000 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Wouldn't the presence of a camera, by your logic, cause a student to be more susceptible to a low pull because he's showing off for the camera?

That actually can and does happen.

Nice argument FAIL, genius.
As others have already alluded, you are showing your own inexperience, and clearly - NOT knowing, what you do not even know.

A good, conscientious outside camera-flyer professional will recognize when a FJC student is becoming either fixated or distracted by the camera being there, and will REMOVE it (i.e. himself/herself) from the situation tout-suite. A good, conscientious professional AFFI will recognize this, and quickly rotate the student AWAY from the camera (and yes, "sacrifice" the video in trade-off for the students SAFETY FIRST) if necessary.

I've in my experience, seen BOTH of these instances/examples, actually happen.

So now then, what more have you got, other than your totally specious, unfounded, completely empty (and inaccurate in their entirety) arguments? You would be well served instead of just spouting for the sake of hearing yourself spout, or insert yourself into subject matter you CLEARLY don't understand... instead maybe (really, truly) to STOP, THINK, LISTEN ...and CONSIDER

Your assertions and presumptions in this matter, as evidenced by your clearly incorrect (based) rebuttul(s) - other than for purpose of you maybe trying to be (apparently) inflammatory - are absolutely wrong.

FWIW


(This post was edited by Scrumpot on Nov 11, 2011, 4:39 PM)


mpohl

Nov 11, 2011, 3:34 PM
Post #93 of 147 (996 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Squeak] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

 

This video has been removed by the user.
Sorry about that. [YOUTUBE.COM]

Smart move, kid! Who needs these armchairs quarterbacks on dorkzone.com anyways. They'll stretch a 0.5s decision, into a 30-day discussion.

'Cause they got nothing better to do!!!!





virgin-burner

Nov 11, 2011, 3:50 PM
Post #94 of 147 (981 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

life turned qute back on ye' in the last couple of weeks, didnt it!? Unimpressed

LaughLaughLaugh


Trae  (Student)

Nov 11, 2011, 3:52 PM
Post #95 of 147 (980 views)
Shortcut
Re: [d100965] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

inreply to "200 jumps, C license and not being a complete fuckwit is required before jumping with camera. Sorted "
..................................................

Laugh
These are people that jump the gun and don't go back for the restart. They win in their own little race.

They got 'oppositional defiance disorder' .
It usually ends in tears don't it?


sacex250

Nov 11, 2011, 3:54 PM
Post #96 of 147 (980 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The truth, it seems, is that you need 200 AND the C license to meet the USPA requirement (with the 200 jumps just being there due to it's requirement for earning a C license).
The truth is that having two hundred jumps, in and of itself, does not meet the recommendation for jumping with a camera. The problem is that the recommendation is so universally misquoted on this forum that I'm sure there are numerous people who think that the recommendation is actually just 200 jumps. We already know there's a lot of people who are clearly confused between a requirement and a recommendation.

The recommendation in the SIM clearly states "C-License". To "infer" that what the USPA really meant was 200 jumps is just as inaccurate as saying that the minimum recommendation is having landed within two meters of target on 25 jumps.


(This post was edited by sacex250 on Nov 11, 2011, 4:40 PM)


airtwardo  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 4:38 PM
Post #97 of 147 (960 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The truth, it seems, is that you need 200 AND the C license to meet the USPA requirement (with the 200 jumps just being there due to it's requirement for earning a C license).
The truth is that having two hundred jumps, in and of itself, does not meet the recommendation for jumping with a camera. The problem is that the recommendation is so universally misquoted on this forum that I'm sure there are numerous people who think that the recommedation is actually just 200 jumps. We already know there's a lot of people who are clearly confused between a requirement and a recommendation.

The recommendation in the SIM clearly states "C-License". To "infer" that what the USPA really meant was 200 jumps is just as inaccurate as saying that landing within two meters of target on 25 jumps is the minimum requirement.


LaughLaughLaugh Wooosshh


david3  (D 21297)

Nov 11, 2011, 5:20 PM
Post #98 of 147 (940 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So then, why is it that students are allowed to hire camera jumpers from their very first jump? Wouldn't the presence of a camera, by your logic, cause a student to be more susceptible to a low pull because he's showing off for the camera?

I very much doubt that's the case. It's probably the opposite way around, a student would be so consumed by trying to get the jump right that the student would forget all about that ContourHD stuck to his head.

Is there a potential threshold at which the value of a small format camera might outweigh the risks, in your eyes? What about a ContourGPS? It's got to be difficult to argue against having a graphical flight path displayed on GoogleMaps inset on a video of the jump.

Flight Recorder

The problem is that jumpers can't seem to plan a jump and jump the plan. Is it really that hard to do a proper skydive?

Or, is this a territorial dispute because of professional video jumpers who are going to lose money because they've been largely replaced by technology? Is the C-License requirement just a moritoreum to keep camera jumpers employed by restricting jumpers from grabbing their own videos?

It just seems to me that there's more to this than just the safety issue.

I salute you on this excellent troll. No matter how dumb it is you have managed to suck people right in. I think when people take a second look at your post they will realize you couldnt possibly mean the things you have written.
Well done.


Amazon  (D License)

Nov 11, 2011, 7:51 PM
Post #99 of 147 (903 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sacex250] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

What you don't know... is that a LOT of vidiots and the people in front of the camera....trying to get cool video... are now dead.

Some of them were my friends.

What you do not know in this sport... can indeed be lethal.

Unsure


danielcroft  (D 31103)

Nov 11, 2011, 11:05 PM
Post #100 of 147 (866 views)
Shortcut
Re: [d100965] 2 out roof landing [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Who the hell is in charge at the Ranch these days?
Just because he says he's going to keep jumping the camera doesn't mean he is. IMO, if I'd taken a low pull down to AAD firing I'd ground myself for a while and really work out what happened before jumping again. I can imagine it happening but damn, I'd have had to have really fucked up to get there.

In reply to:
200 jumps, C license and not being a complete fuckwit is required before jumping with camera. Sorted Wink
d100965 - win

Hasn't anyone learned? When someone posts a video like this, download a copy because it's sure to be taken down quick smart after they feel the heat. Yes, I did.

I'm not trying to burn Denis and as I said, I wasn't there when this happend but I know who spoke with him and I know they're not the types to fuck around or mince words. I have faith in both of those people, trust them and respect them. I'm heading up this weekend, I'll see what the deal is.


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

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)