POV cameras and Jump number.

[The111 0]

JWest

People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about how ridiculous that statement is? It's literally impossible to know about everything. Since it is impossible to know everything and people in general are aware that they do not know about everything how can one claim that someone isn't aware that they don't know something? It's why people learn. It's like saying that people aren't aware there is something to learn about. Which again is a ridiculous statement.

Scenario A:
I understand some of the basics about how an internal combustion engine works. But there are some intricate details I don't know, and I am aware that I don't know them.

Scenario B:
An English speaking caveman emerges from a nearby mountain and witnesses civilization for the first time. At this point in his life, he does not even know internal combustion engines exist. He doesn't know what he doesn't know.

The difference between those scenarios is striking, but I'm not entirely surprised if you don't see it, given the course of this thread.

Now to take the story a little further, imagine the caveman is given a tour of the Ford factory that very next morning, and 5 minutes in he jumps out of line and starts giving the machinists advice...

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[JWest 0]

Mik, I'm going to humor you. Camera flying has its own discipline. Of course there is more to learn than the basics of safely jumping a Gopro. I never claimed otherwise.

ghost47

Quote

Since it is impossible to know everything and people in general are aware that they do not know about everything how can one claim that someone isn't aware that they don't know something? It's why people learn. It's like saying that people aren't aware there is something to learn about. Which again is a ridiculous statement.

Several years ago, I remember talking to some students who were off AFF, but were not yet licensed. They were telling me how they were trying some freeflying with student rigs. The rigs were not freefly friendly. But they didn't know that. They didn't even know there was such a concept as freefly friendly. They just knew there was such a thing as freeflying, and couldn't think of any reason why they shouldn't try it themselves.

Today, I witnessed a non-licensed jumper who had gone tracking. Besides not knowing that he wasn't permitted to do a tracking jump as a student, he didn't know in which direction tracking jumps went, and I'm betting he had no idea why it was important to have a direction, and also why he shouldn't track up and down the line of flight.

These are examples of people not knowing what they don't know.

Fair enough, those are excellent examples of that phase being applied. "not knowing what they don't know" = Clueless. I can't claim those people don't exist. So I stand corrected. Thank, you for clarifying that this term works when applied to a specific scenario.

Honestly reading those examples made me cringe. We live in the age of information, what kind of person goes out and tries something without doing and kind of research? That's crazy we have, google, this web site, an instructor/experienced jumper, why would you not use any of those resources! If it is new to you then there is definitely more you can learn about it even if it's not new there is something you can lear about it. People like that drive me absolutely insane. Thanks, for reminding me they exist and that I despise them.


The111: however the caveman should know that there are things in that civilization that he doesn't know about. The phrase only works when applied to a specific scenario. The caveman would be naive about the engine but he should at lease be aware that there will be things he doesn't know about. But then again some people are just... clueless.

[dorbie 0]

JWest

I'm going to humor you.

O RLY?

Your perception of who is humoring whom here and what you look like is ever so slightly off, and it's not a generational thing.

Forget cavemen analogies, you're a virgin offering opinions on how to organize a gang bang.

[JWest 0]

dorbie

***I'm going to humor you.

O RLY?

Your perception of who is humoring whom here and what you look like is ever so slightly off, and it's not a generational thing.

Forget cavemen analogies, you're a virgin offering opinions on how to organize a gang bang.

I'm just going to admit right off the bat that 'humor' was not the proper word to use because no one is humoring anyone.

I'm fully aware of what I look like to the majority of you.

I wasn't aware that I was offering advice, probably because I'm not. We were talking about the risks of POV cameras, it was established the there was a physical risk (snags) and a mental risk (distraction). I fully agree that they pose a snag hazard. I also acknowledge that camera is a distraction (subjective) however it while it poses an active distraction to some people others are able to stay focused and eliminate that distraction by "filming and forgetting." There are two points I made either agree or disagree it's up to you, I would like to know your stance.

The caveman analogy was a good one. But what the hell I'll play your game. A virgin offering advice on how to organize a gang bang... Someones virginity status doesn't correlate with there ability to organize people. Perhaps this virgin is a party planner. Surely that experience would help them with the logistics. Furthermore we have google and I'm sure the virgin would have non-virgin friends. Between the two of those it wouldn't be too hard to track down a sex club. LGBT bars are also an excellent source for information like this. Again still all thing that could be found on google. So yeah a virgin could offer advice on organizing a gang bang/ could organize one. sure its obliquely but it is a possibility. Let's try to stay somewhat on topic because this is way out there.

Now that nonsense has been addressed can you just reply to the underlined part so we can get back on track or at least away from the above ridiculousness? But to keep the side conversation going I will answer and 5 questions you have as long as it wouldn't contain and PII.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

JWest

****** ...I enjoy front riser turns but I normally do them around 2k. 720 Is as much as I'll do because I'll hit about 65 MPH (according to my Viso II) and that close enough to cypress firing speed.

And why would that be a problem?

Or is that something else that you "don't know that you don't know"?

Is that a real question(s)?

People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about how ridiculous that statement is? It's literally impossible to know about everything. Since it is impossible to know everything and people in general are aware that they do not know about everything how can one claim that someone isn't aware that they don't know something? It's why people learn. It's like saying that people aren't aware there is something to learn about. Which again is a ridiculous statement.

But I'm curious, what is it exactly that you don't think I have ever considered/hear of/read about/experienced/discussed that is directly related to my post?

Bolding mine.

That's exactly what it means. That someone is completely unaware of their lack of knowledge.

When someone is doing something and appears ignorant of the risk, not just in skydiving, they will respond: "I didn't even think of that" when it's pointed out to them.

To put it a slightly different way, you have to know what questions to ask before you can learn something.

The part I quoted (and it's a direct, unaltered quote; I just clipped it short) seems to indicate that you don't do turns bigger than 720 because you are concerned about your vertical speed and your CYPRES firing.

Is that correct?

If so, are you aware of the conditions that will cause a CYPRES to fire?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Di0 1]

JWest

Is that a real question(s)?

People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about how ridiculous that statement is? It's literally impossible to know about everything.

Well, no, not really. The Socratic "one thing I know for sure is that I don't know" does apply here. In more concrete terms:
a) kid with 50 jumps wants to fly camera, thinks he'd be alright but is aware of the 200 jump rule/recommendation and tells himself "I don't understand why it's there, but there is probably a good reason, I'll wait". Kid doesn't know but he's aware he doesn't know everything. That's fine.
b) kid with 200 jumps, wants to fly camera but hasn't talked to cameraman, hasn't done homework, isn't 100% sure of his freefall skills yet, decides to postpone. He understands the problem but he doesn't know how to fly a camera, or hasn't done his research yet, but he's aware of its existence and what needs to be done before trying, that's fine. He doesn't know everything but probably knows enough to make an educated decision when time comes.
c) kid with less than 200 jumps, that clearly doesn't understands the problematic involved with it, changes his position and statements 4 times in 3 posts, disregards others' opinions because his mind is already made and even a post signed by both Ridley Scott and Bill Booth (or, in one word: Norman Kent) would not convince him otherwise, that flying a camera with less than 200 jumps would be dangerous AND useless: he doesn't know what he doesn't know.

I'm standing on the edge
With a vision in my head
My body screams release me
My dreams they must be fed... You're in flight.

[wmw999 2,116]

Some people really are that good. Some people really are that lucky. Most people are neither of those as much as they think they are.

The more people out there doing something, the more likely it is that the occasional anomaly will show up. Also, the more people are doing things, the more an arbitrary rule, instead of individual mentoring, is needed. Because there just aren't enough qualified and willing mentors out there.

If you're waiting for a general accolade that you are likely that good, ain't gonna happen. Partly because most of us don't know you, and partly because your posting history on this topic resembles other notable "fast learners" more than it resembles that of the eventual acknowledged high performers.

So if there are going to be rules, they can't be set for the top 1%. Especially in a litigious society and time like the US right now.

It's right up there with allowing 15-year-olds to go to war. Happened in WW2.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Remster 24]

Quote

JWest

Send a Private MessagePM Add to FriendsFriend



Registered: Sep 30, 2014
Posts: 207

Oct 12, 2014, 10:48 PM
Post #1 of 357 (17782 views)

In the time you've been posted on this thread, you should have been able to do 200 jumps.

Remster

[JohnnyMarko 1]

Remster

Quote

JWest

Send a Private MessagePM Add to FriendsFriend



Registered: Sep 30, 2014
Posts: 207

Oct 12, 2014, 10:48 PM
Post #1 of 357 (17782 views)

In the time you've been posted on this thread, you should have been able to do 200 jumps.

[billvon 2,380]

>People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about
>how ridiculous that statement is?

Yes, it is silly when you think about it. But people regularly lecture other people here about stuff they don't know - because they don't know that they don't know it.

>It's like saying that people aren't aware there is something to learn about.

Also true. A lot of skydivers are simply not aware of (for example) other cutaway systems, or the issues with blast handles, or problems with small cameras. If they were more aware of the field they are discussing, they would be able to contribute more.

[ghost47 18]

Quote

Honestly reading those examples made me cringe. We live in the age of information, what kind of person goes out and tries something without doing and kind of research? That's crazy we have, google, this web site, an instructor/experienced jumper, why would you not use any of those resources! If it is new to you then there is definitely more you can learn about it even if it's not new there is something you can lear about it. People like that drive me absolutely insane. Thanks, for reminding me they exist and that I despise them.

What it comes down to, in my opinion, is whether you think what you're trying consists of something new, or will add elements of danger, or whether it's just a variation of something you've done before.

For example, when some friends and I tried to do new formations in RW that we had never done before, we didn't often ask for advice, we just tried them. That was not the best way to learn, but we certainly didn't feel it was a safety issue. Because we had each done RW previously, and this was just a variation on that.

In the same way, I'm betting many new camera flyers see putting a go-pro on their head as just a variation of what they've previously done -- it's just a skydive, except now I need to press a few buttons before I exit, what's the big deal? So it doesn't occur to them to do research, because they're not trying something new or radically different.

In other words, they don't know what they don't know.

[lyosha 46]

JWest

People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about how ridiculous that statement is?

Not that ridiculous. I had a friend pass away due to a malfunction scenario he couldn't have conceived possible. I've met at least one other person that narrowly escaped when a quirk in his gear he did not know about turned a routine situation life and death.

I have read far from every post that you've made, but as someone that's used a GoPro from jump ~70 onward I can tell you my approach differed from your approach in that I took the "what can go wrong?" question very very very seriously and took the most conservative approach that I could, which is not something 90+% of people with small format cameras do, sadly.

Ironically in retrospect I am okay with my actions at 70 jumps, but now at well over 200 jumps I'm still not okay with doing what most people do with GoPros for myself still. My mount broke recently (in the car ride to the DZ) and I've been jumping without a GoPro for a little. I feel a little naked without my visual logbook, but I'd rather wait the two weeks for my new mount to be made than do what a lot of my friends do. Because I'm not okay with jumping a camera without a cutaway - informed personal choice. But you just don't hear the words "informed personal choice" very often on dropzones nowadays. You hear a lot of "you need X jumps" and "It'll be okay" and "it worked fine for my friend for 50 jumps".

Risk analysis seems to be devoid from what you are saying. And that is my issue with what you are saying. And effectively I'm on your side of the fence on the issue. I'm just not sure 200 jumps is what you need.

At this stage, this thread has come full circle from useful -> entertaining -> painful to watch. Time to call it a thread and move on to actually skydiving?

[kallend 1,620]

JWest

****** ...I enjoy front riser turns but I normally do them around 2k. 720 Is as much as I'll do because I'll hit about 65 MPH (according to my Viso II) and that close enough to cypress firing speed.

And why would that be a problem?

Or is that something else that you "don't know that you don't know"?

Is that a real question(s)?

People keep saying "don't know what you don't know" Have you ever thought about how ridiculous that statement is?

No. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dorbie 0]

kallend

No. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

He's already got this covered Kallend.

JWest

That is not the Dunning–Kruger effect. Some people are better at handling stress than others. Some people are capable of learning faster than others. Some people understand things naturally while others do not. These are all proven, it's why an average exists. This is not something you can argue against.

To paraphrase Neil deGrasse Tyson, the Dunning-Kruger effect applies to you whether or not you believe it applies to you.

Or less eloquently; if you spend weeks waxing forth verbosely about a topic you have armchair knowledge of and zero experience doing and you are debating professionals with thousands of skydives and years of experience doing then you just might be deep in the Dunning-Kruger hole.

[JWest 0]

wolfriverjoe

When someone is doing something and appears ignorant of the risk, not just in skydiving, they will respond: "I didn't even think of that" when it's pointed out to them.

To put it a slightly different way, you have to know what questions to ask before you can learn something.

The part I quoted (and it's a direct, unaltered quote; I just clipped it short) seems to indicate that you don't do turns bigger than 720 because you are concerned about your vertical speed and your CYPRES firing.

Is that correct?

If so, are you aware of the conditions that will cause a CYPRES to fire?

You're right, that is what it means. The concept of doing something without researching it first blows my mind. I would never do that. I forgot sometime that is not true for all people. I don't like those people.

That is correct. Mine is still default (750 ft and 78MPH). If I do a 720 from 2k+ ish it normally puts me right about 1000 feet. Then I enter my landing pattern at 900. If I held it past 720 say a 900 there is a chance that my AAD would fire, causing a two out. I could of course test different degrees of turns up higher to find the corresponding attitude loss then adjust my starting hight. But 720 is fun and right at the edge of my 1 arm strength so I'll just stick with that. If someone owns an AAD they should know the conditions that it will fire.

wmw999

Some people really are that good. Some people really are that lucky. Most people are neither of those as much as they think they are.

The more people out there doing something, the more likely it is that the occasional anomaly will show up. Also, the more people are doing things, the more an arbitrary rule, instead of individual mentoring, is needed. Because there just aren't enough qualified and willing mentors out there.

If you're waiting for a general accolade that you are likely that good, ain't gonna happen. Partly because most of us don't know you, and partly because your posting history on this topic resembles other notable "fast learners" more than it resembles that of the eventual acknowledged high performers.

So if there are going to be rules, they can't be set for the top 1%. Especially in a litigious society and time like the US right now.

It's right up there with allowing 15-year-olds to go to war. Happened in WW2.

Wendy P.

That is all true. I don't expect people to say that I am likely that good. As you pointed out none of you know me. I just want people to acknowledge in general that there are people capable of 'clicking and forgetting" while using a POV camera.

Remster

Quote

JWest

Oct 12, 2014, 10:48 PM
Post #1 of 357 (17782 views)

In the time you've been posted on this thread, you should have been able to do 200 jumps.

Winter, C-182, DZ only open on weekends, weather is not favorable, money, I have a life outside of skydiving. If I'm lucky I will hit 200 by the end of this season. More likely it will happen at the beginning of next year, unless I spend a couple weekends at a turbine DZ over the winter. I do look forward to my first turbine ride.

Lyosha- I assure that my thought process in not lacking risk analysis. I am aware of the risks and also aware of ways to minimize those risks. Cant skydive during the week days! Just work, reading, and you guys to entertain me.

[dorbie 0]

The analogy was largely about your credibility but woosh..... more water off a duck's back.

JWest

But to keep the side conversation going....

You still think this is a debate or discussion, it is not. It's closer to an intervention that's turned into a farce because you don't know when to give up the gates.

The phrase "You don't know what you don't know" is not merely a shallow tautology. It means you do not know the vast scope of what you don't know. It means you are not even in a position to assess just how much there is to know and how much of it you don't know and therefore how much of it might kill you. Unlike some I do not think it is at all silly. I do think to read it glibly is to miss the point and weight of the truism.

[JWest 0]

dorbie

The analogy was largely about your credibility but woosh..... more water off a duck's back.

***But to keep the side conversation going....

You still think this is a debate or discussion, it is not. It's closer to an intervention that's turned into a farce because you don't know when to give up the gates.

The phrase "You don't know what you don't know" is not merely a shallow tautology. It means you do not know the vast scope of what you don't know. It means you are not even in a position to assess just how much there is to know and how much of it you don't know and therefore how much of it might kill you. Unlike some I do not think it is at all silly. I do think to read it glibly is to miss the point and weight of the truism.

Tautology- nice word use.

This should still be a debate or discussion. I claim that it is possible to "click and forget" and others claim it is not.

I know you were challenging my credibility. That is why I offered you 5 questions to ask so you will have basis for claims you make in the future.

[billvon 2,380]

>I claim that it is possible to "click and forget" and others claim it is not.

It is of course possible. Someone who is habitually forgetful might indeed forget that they have turned it on; skydivers have forgotten far more essential things.

However, 99.9% of the time people do not "click and forget." They turn it on, then they ask someone to check to see if it's on. They hit it when they try to climb out - or they duck their head enough that they don't hit it. During the skydive they think "hey this will be a cool shot." Under canopy they look around to give a cool panorama. They look at their altimeter to "show the camera" what altitude they are at. When they are in the pattern and they see something interesting they point their head at it. It's happened to me, and it has happened to a very large number of other people. Usually they get away with it. Sometimes they don't.

Claiming that such a problem doesn't exist - or exists only for non-exceptional people - is foolish.

[JWest 0]

billvon

>I claim that it is possible to "click and forget" and others claim it is not.

It is of course possible. Someone who is habitually forgetful might indeed forget that they have turned it on; skydivers have forgotten far more essential things.

However, 99.9% of the time people do not "click and forget." They turn it on, then they ask someone to check to see if it's on. They hit it when they try to climb out - or they duck their head enough that they don't hit it. During the skydive they think "hey this will be a cool shot." Under canopy they look around to give a cool panorama. They look at their altimeter to "show the camera" what altitude they are at. When they are in the pattern and they see something interesting they point their head at it. It's happened to me, and it has happened to a very large number of other people. Usually they get away with it. Sometimes they don't.

Claiming that such a problem doesn't exist - or exists only for non-exceptional people - is foolish.

Claiming that it doesn't exist would be foolish. I would say that is exists for the majority/average jumper. By informing new jumpers that the things you listed can be dangerous some are able to prevent themselves from making to same mistake.

[yoink 321]

This thread has long since lost any worth except to other beginners. JWest will always think he's exceptional... I started off by saying that I think 200 jumps isn't necessarily a great metric, and that a dedicated coaching course would be better. I'm now revising that - it's not necessarily skill that 200 jumps gets you. It's also experiential maturity, and that only comes from time spent skydiving. No amount of book learning makes up for it.


So to them - the future beginners in the sport:

On one side you have someone with basically no experience skydiving claiming one thing with few supporters to back him up. On the other side you have (conservatively) 100 years and 50,000 jumps of collective skydiving experience in all disciplines and ratings.

YOU choose who to pay attention to...


And perhaps a less obvious point that JWest may have missed - this is a small sport. People tend to have only 2 or 3 connections between anyone. If you start getting a reputation as 'that guy' on a DZ or even on a forum, don't be surprised if it follows you around for many years and limits some of your options.

[The111 0]

JWest

By informing new jumpers that the things you listed can be dangerous some are able to prevent themselves from making to same mistake.

You seem to continue pushing a false dichotomy that we must choose between inexperienced and highly informed or experienced and poorly informed. The simple truth is that information and experience are both invaluable, and more importantly, not interchangeable.

A simple question for you, since you seem to like trying to boil the entire debate down to yes/no questions:

Do you believe knowledge is a replacement for experience?

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[JWest 0]

yoink

This thread has long since lost any worth except to other beginners. JWest will always think he's exceptional ... I started off by saying that I think 200 jumps isn't necessarily a great metric, and that a dedicated coaching course would be better. I'm now revising that - it's not necessarily skill that 200 jumps gets you. It's also experiential maturity, and that only comes from time spent skydiving. No amount of book learning makes up for it.


So to them - the future beginners in the sport:

On one side you have someone with basically no experience skydiving claiming one thing (that is camera related not skydiving related) with few supporters to back him up. On the other side you have (conservatively) 100 years and 50,000 jumps of collective skydiving experience in all disciplines and ratings.

YOU choose who to pay attention to...


And perhaps a less obvious point that JWest may have missed - this is a small sport. People tend to have only 2 or 3 connections between anyone. If you start getting a reputation as 'that guy' on a DZ or even on a forum, don't be surprised if it follows you around for many years and limits some of your options.

I didn't miss it. You guys seem to be making a lot of assumptions based off of my view on someones ability to handle the distraction handled by a camera. That is one topic. I've offered to answer questions so you can get an actual basis to judge me by.

The111

***By informing new jumpers that the things you listed can be dangerous some are able to prevent themselves from making to same mistake.

You seem to continue pushing a false dichotomy that we must choose between inexperienced and highly informed or experienced and poorly informed. The simple truth is that information and experience are both invaluable, and more importantly, not interchangeable.

A simple question for you, since you seem to like trying to boil the entire debate down to yes/no questions:

Do you believe knowledge is a replacement for experience?



I am not pushing that choice at all. Information and experience are both important. The context of what is being considered is important in making that distinction. Having the information can eliminate the need to experience it for yourself.

I'm not trying to boil it down to a yes/no questions. Your question is not specific enough for a yes or no answer anyway because it lacks context.

But to answer it. No, knowledge is not a replacement for experience. Yes, knowledge can be a replacement for experience. (That is a general statement not specifically directed at skydiving)

[yoink 321]

JWest

(that is camera related not skydiving related)

That's YOUR belief. Our experience actually you know, skydiving, suggests something else for 99.9% of people.


Again. I'm done discussing with you. You're a 100 jump wonder who is absolutely convinced they're right. I've seen your sort a dozen times before.

Any time I see you giving advice to another beginner, I'll refer them to this thread so they can make judgements about how you form your opinions. If you're wrong on this what else might you be wrong on...

[wasatchrider 0]

it funny because i forget to turn it on half the time and always bump it on the door

BASE 1519

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

JWest

That is correct. Mine is still default (750 ft and 78MPH). If I do a 720 from 2k+ ish it normally puts me right about 1000 feet. Then I enter my landing pattern at 900. If I held it past 720 say a 900 there is a chance that my AAD would fire, causing a two out. I could of course test different degrees of turns up higher to find the corresponding attitude loss then adjust my starting hight. But 720 is fun and right at the edge of my 1 arm strength so I'll just stick with that. If someone owns an AAD they should know the conditions that it will fire.

So what are you jumping and how are you loading it that you lose 1100 feet and top 60 mph in a two rotation turn?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo