Rules for jumping with a camera

[xtheowl 0]

Hello,

I recently returned to jumping after a loooong break. Back in the day, I used to rubberband a camera to my helmet and take still shots, and I had only ~30 jumps and an A license.

When I jumped recently, I was going to strap a keychain video camera (1"x1.5"x1/4") to the back of my hand, but was told I needed 200 jumps to do this.

Are there new regulations out prohibiting lower license holders from using cameras? If so, are they FAA? USPA? Local dropzone specific?

(Sorry if this is a repost, but I didnt find an answer with a search.)

Thanks very much,

XTO

[theonlyski 3]

Quote

Are there new regulations out prohibiting lower license holders from using cameras? If so, are they FAA? USPA? Local dropzone specific?

USPA recommends a C-License (200 jumps)

Some DZ's have rules that require that, more, or even less.

There are hundreds of threads on here about WHY they want/require them. Basically it comes down to safety. Not all of the safety is in the rigging of the camera, its in the mentality of the jumper, and if they're capable of multitasking and being safe.

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[billvon 2,406]

>When I jumped recently, I was going to strap a keychain video camera
>(1"x1.5"x1/4") to the back of my hand, but was told I needed 200 jumps
>to do this.

This is (partly) the result of a lot of injuries and incidents due to people jumping with small-format cameras. DSE has a good list of what happened to a bunch of people who thought they would just tape a tiny camera on to their helmet, turn it on and forget it.

>Are there new regulations out prohibiting lower license holders from using
>cameras? If so, are they FAA? USPA? Local dropzone specific?

USPA recommends a C license before jumping camera. DZ's, as always, are the final enforcer of USPA rules and recommendations.

[xtheowl 0]

Thanks for the info!

Is this a new recommendation? Also, I couldn't find the recommendation in the 2011 Skydiver's Information Manual I dl'd from the USPA website. Any idea where the recommendation is published?

Thanks again,

XTO

[billvon 2,406]

>Any idea where the recommendation is published?

http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section6/tabid/169/Default.aspx#983

[theonlyski 3]

Quote

Thanks for the info!

Is this a new recommendation? Also, I couldn't find the recommendation in the 2011 Skydiver's Information Manual I dl'd from the USPA website. Any idea where the recommendation is published?

Thanks again,

XTO

Section 6-8 E-1-c specifically.

ETA: HERE is the small format camera incident list started by DSE.

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[xtheowl 0]

You guys are fast and awesome! (Sorry I missed it the first time.)

-XTO

[xtheowl 0]

I just read all the small format camera stories. All I can say is WOW.

If these are the kind of people jumping nowadays, I am in FULL support of this recommendation.

Might I also suggest a new recommendation of an IQ score>80 before boarding a plane. Might make a lot of the other rules unnecessary...

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I just read all the small format camera stories. All I can say is WOW.

If these are the kind of people jumping nowadays, I am in FULL support of this recommendation.

Might I also suggest a new recommendation of an IQ score>80 before boarding a plane. Might make a lot of the other rules unnecessary...

Welcome back!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[DSE 3]

Quote

Might I also suggest a new recommendation of an IQ score>80 before boarding a plane. Might make a lot of the other rules unnecessary...

One would think. Then again...using rubberbands to secure a camera *might* fall into the "low IQ" category as well...a hard opening might cause pain for someone/something on the ground, too...

I'm sure that every person in the small-format incidents/issues listing thought that they were _not_ one of "those guys."

[xtheowl 0]

Yeah, I hear you. (In my defense, it was many new parachute bag bands, pull tested to >50lbs with no give. Plus I had the wrist cord anchored tight.)

At any rate, maybe IQ is the wrong metric. Maybe I'm thinking of presence of mind, which the people in these stories have a demonstrated lack of. If a camera doesn't distract them and get them in trouble it will just be something else. Trying to sit fly. Goofing around with a buddy. A stuck altimeter. Or maybe a pretty bird will fly past and they'll fly their chute into the side of a water tower.

[wmw999 2,128]

Look at my tagline.

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)

[DSE 3]

Quote

Yeah, I hear you. (In my defense, it was many new parachute bag bands, pull tested to >50lbs with no give. Plus I had the wrist cord anchored tight.)

If I understand you correctly, if you'd have had an entanglement with your camera, you'd have had no ability to cleanly cutaway?

[bqmassey 0]

Honestly though, don't y'all think there is a difference between a "camera flyer" and someone who's jumping for POV footage?

1.) A jumper wants to wear a GoPro while him and his buddy practice sitflying so they can analyze it on the ground

2.) A jumper wants to start filming tandems (strapping on a Rebel and a CX-100 with bite switch and ring sight) or for competition teams

To me, those situations are entirely different. Sure, they both add a level of distraction that doesn't exist without them, but in entirely different degrees. Example 1, the focus of the jump isn't photography, the focus of the jump is... the jump. Example 2, the camera flyer is focused on angles and shots and getting good footage.

Certainly there's a gap in the amount of experience needed to do this safely, or do y'all really think that as soon as a person is competent enough to wear a GoPro to get some POV footage, they're also fully prepared to start flying around and below tandems and AFF students while wearing an HD cam and a digital SLR on their head.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that wearing a GoPro should be taken lightly. Anyone who wants to do so should be well briefed on the additional hazards and distraction it poses and prepare accordingly, but certainly it doesn't require the same amount of skill and experience as does being a "camera flyer".

In my opinion, there's a difference between a fun jumper with a camera, and a "camera flyer", and that difference extends beyond just the size of the camera.

[DanG 1]

Right. At 200 jumps you might be ready to be a fun jumper with a camera. It takes a lot more experience to become a "camera flyer".

- Dan G

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Right. At 200 jumps you might be ready to be a fun jumper with a camera. It takes a lot more experience to become a "camera flyer".

Depends on the DZ. Have you seen some of the product being put out lately?

[bqmassey 0]

Quote

Right. At 200 jumps you might be ready to be a fun jumper with a camera. It takes a lot more experience to become a "camera flyer".

Good, I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees a difference between the two. Personally, I don't feel like they're the same thing.

There definitely is a common ground, though. Both POVers and camera flyers should expect the extra distraction and find ways to mitigate the dangers imposed because of it, both should be familiar with the snag hazards, and both should have EPs suitable for their setup. A certain amount of jumps shouldn't be a sole prerequisite. I'd hope that someone with 2000 jumps who's never worn a camera, and someone with 50 jumps who's never worn a camera, would both seek advice from someone with camera experience.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Honestly though, don't y'all think there is a difference between a "camera flyer" and someone who's jumping for POV footage?

No.

The same potential snag issues and distractions from the things you should be doing exist in both cases.

Quote

In my opinion, there's a difference between a fun jumper with a camera, and a "camera flyer", and that difference extends beyond just the size of the camera.

Yup. A fun jumper with a camera needs to pay for his own ticket, while a camera flyer may have his slot and pack job covered. When the video isn't very good the fun jumper probably won't even get comments and the camera flyer may get fired.

[xtheowl 0]

Great discussion!

OK, first thing I will say is that I respect the rules, even if I disagree with them, so I will, of course, NOT jump a camera until I have permission.

Having said that...

The snag issues from a camera the size of a key-chain secured to the back of ones right hand are almost non-existent and a HECK of a lot less than the snag issues from a full-on camera-fliers rig. Likewise, the concentration needed to focus on filming people who are paying you to do a good job is much, much more than that needed to make something just to throw on facebook. I really cannot believe anyone truly thinks these are the same thing.

I fully agree that some people should NOT be allowed to fly with a camera. It is, however, my very humble opinion that a blanket ban on anyone with less than 200 jumps is not the answer. The ability to maintain presence of mind is a largely innate thing, and also varies from person to person. I believe it should fall to the judgment of the DZ owner as to an individuals temperament that determines who is allowed the responsibility and who isn't.

I also think it would be a great idea to have a standard list of rules regarding camera operation. (Mounting requirements, being briefed on hazards, hands off once on jump run, etc.)

Again, I will always follow the rules. I'm mainly just venting a little bit of frustration here.
I have the same issue with my inability to buy some new lawn darts. :)

Thanks again for all the feedback,

xto

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Quote

Great discussion!

.....The snag issues from a camera the size of a key-chain secured to the back of ones right hand are almost non-existent and a HECK of a lot less than the snag issues from a full-on camera-fliers rig. Likewise, the concentration needed to focus on filming people who are paying you to do a good job is much, much more than that needed to make something just to throw on facebook. I really cannot believe anyone truly thinks these are the same thing.

I fully agree that some people should NOT be allowed to fly with a camera. It is, however, my very humble opinion that a blanket ban on anyone with less than 200 jumps is not the answer. The ability to maintain presence of mind is a largely innate thing, and also varies from person to person. I believe it should fall to the judgment of the DZ owner as to an individuals temperament that determines who is allowed the responsibility and who isn't.

I also think it would be a great idea to have a standard list of rules regarding camera operation. (Mounting requirements, being briefed on hazards, hands off once on jump run, etc.)....................

Those are all very good points. However, remember that the 200 jump recommendation is a "minimum" recommendation. You should start your camera career no sooner.

And, with that in mind, I’m going to be a camera flyer when I grow up!

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[DSE 3]

Quote

The snag issues from a camera the size of a key-chain secured to the back of ones right hand are almost non-existent

You're sure about that?

Quote

Likewise, the concentration needed to focus on filming people who are paying you to do a good job is much, much more than that needed to make something just to throw on facebook. I really cannot believe anyone truly thinks these are the same thing.

Did you read the Small Format Camera list?
Most problems in that list are related to pre-jump or in-jump distractions. History shows that most of us that feel we're above average aren't.

[PhreeZone 15]

Right hand has entanglement issues with the pilot chute during deployment.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Joellercoaster 6]

Quote

Honestly though, don't y'all think there is a difference between a "camera flyer" and someone who's jumping for POV footage?

Sure there is. Which is why the USPA recommendation (and, here, BPA regulation) is 200 for anybody with any camera, and there's at least one separate manufacturer's recommendation of 500 to film tandems.

I know there are places with 300-jump tandem vidiots, but I wouldn't send anybody I know there.

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[davelepka 4]

Quote

the concentration needed to focus on filming people who are paying you to do a good job is much, much more than that needed to make something just to throw on facebook. I really cannot believe anyone truly thinks these are the same thing.

I don't think anyone believes they are the 'same' thing, but the simple fact of the matter is that you are not the 'same' as a guy with the skill and experience to be paid to jump. So while his job may require more effort, his skills and experience are appropriately more developed.

However, many areas are similar. You both have camera equipment to deal with. Yours may just need one button pushed before exit, but doing that and then re-checking it right before you exit will add to your workload in the plane. Will it add a lot? No, but with 40-some jumps over 16 years, how much more do you want aside from gear checks, being aware of your rig/pins as you move around, and getting ready for your skydive?

In freefall, you both have another job to do besides making a parachute jump. The camera flyer actaully has the benefit of filming others, so he has a much better chance of not getting sucked into the jump and going low. There's a good chance that one of the people being filmed will break off on time, and end the jump. Even if they don't, his greater experience probably has him better preparred for taking care of his own altitude awareness.

What's to stop you from looking into your little camera and smoking right through your pull altitude? Your finely tuned sense of timing based on 1000's of jumps? If you're filming yourself, it's a closed loop. It's just you, and if you make one mistake, there is no 'back up' like another jumper to track off at the right time. Even if there was, what's to stop you from looking into the lens after break off for a little too long.

How about under canopy, were you planning to just shit-can that part of the jump, or did you want shots of you under canopy? All that's going to do is take your focus off the canopy ride and traffic. An regualr camera flyer cannot film themselves, so their attention is always outward under canopy, so they are actaully better off than you would have been in that sense.

Don't fall into the trap that you have been 'jumping' for 16 years. You haven't. You have been jumping 46 times, no more, no less. A lot has changed, and a lot has been learned in the last 16 years, I've been jumping that whole time and have seen it happen.

Skydiving can be 'safe' provided that you act according to your skills. People with zero jumps make safe jumps all the time via AFF lv 1. It takes all day, and two highly trained instructors to make it safe, but it's possible. You're not at that level, but you're not that far off either. Ask around the DZ, and see the average time in the sport of the other jumpers with 46 jumps. You're going to find that most have been in the sport less than a year, and that's what you're up against. Act like a guy with 46 jumps and a limited amount of exposure to the sport, and you'll do fine. Act like a guy who's been jumping 'for years', and you'll find yourself in over your head. You won't be the fist guy to do that, and you won't be the last, but it's never a good thing to find that you have become 'that guy'.

[jimmytavino 16]

Re : " i believe it should fall to the judgement of the DZ Owner "

(edited to make the correction that this response more correctly should be to the O P and, not to skyjumpenfool
, as the words i quoted above are from xtheowl... sorry....)

not always a good idea...

some DZOs judgement could be clouded by..

The NEED for a vidographer to meet the demands of the tandem business... i.e. a dz with only a few camera flyers might run into situtations where the demand exceeds the staff...
and so the DZO simply says,, "sure, You can be a tandem videographer"...NOT Good.

the situation where the local "teacher's pet" wants to jump a camera,, and because that person might be a favorite of the DZo.. Permission is granted..

A case where the local money bags jumper, for whom $$$ is no object, and who has Flown through the AFF progression, and up into the licensing process, and has been a gREAT customer to the DZO for gear, and jumpsuits, and accessories, and whose Check ALWAYS clears the bank,, and so NOW THAT deems them able to ASK about jumping a camera,,, and so.... Not wanting that "golden Goose" to head to the competing DZ,, the owner says, "Sure, No problem"

I have GREAT respect for most DZOs'. they often do a fine job in sometimes difficult cases, and generally can be counted on to make decent decisions.... However,, knowing when the 182 needs an oil change, and when and how bills need to get paid, and what the scheduling is like for the weekend, doesn't necessarily mean that a DZO is a proper judge of when and IF a person is suddenly capable of flying a camera....

better i think, to allow the "community at large" to set the guidelines for what is and isn't sensible , regarding this subject....

imho

jmy