Skydivesg

This was a known issue when the G2 came out but it was addressed and they have been replacing all those lenses. I've not heard of it happening on the G3 but it's possible your helmet mistakinly got an old lens put on it. Contact Cookie at the email below and give him the version of visor which you can find on the left edge of the visor just below the opening mechanism. He will take care of it. He's is an awesome guy who stands behind his product. Good luck. Sandy [email protected] . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

. ........... wrapped in a sleeping bag, holding on to the seat belt with both hands under the bag.............. PUSSY! . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I certainly understand why some will say to stay with an open face until you've gained more experience and I do not disagree but it appears you may be at the point to start considering other options. In my opinion I can actually see better with the G2 or G3 even with the lens closed because I don't have goggles that distort my vision. I've tried every goggle out there and none of them work for me in part because I wear contacts and I can't seem to find goggles that seal up on my face. Plus- the G2-G3 helmets actually have better peripheral vision than goggles. When you look peripherally with goggles you are looking at the part where they curve and distort your vision. I don't get this with the Cookie helmets. When I look to the side and actually try to see the edge of the helmet I can't see it. Even sunglasses limit your peripheral vision. I also do not like anything in front of my eyes when I come in to land which is why I flip up the lens. As for fogging - the Cookie helmets initially had a fogging problem but Cookie found a different supplier for the lens and anti-fogging treatment. Now to keep the lens from fogging you simply keep your lens clean with water (and nothing else) and the lens does not fog. As you gain time in this sport you will come to realize that many people will have very strong opinions about things especially gear. I don't doubt someone will respond to this and tell me I'm full of shit but for me, I believe the helmet I jump is as safe or safer than any open face. Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

The strap is easy to adjust. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VujMCriQQ5U Watch this video - at the 3:40 mark Cookie shows how to adjust the Gas helmet which is exaclty how you adjust the G2 or G3. It's easy. Once you find the sweet spot for your head and neck you never have to mess with it again. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

We use to wire the door open on a Van in Nebraska in the early 80s only we put 30 jumpers on board. Yeah stupid - I know. We came to believe that our assholes slamming shut actually created some suction to the floor and helped keep us from sliding out during rotation. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I'm saying the hot melt glue that is supposed to stick the chin cover material to the ABS helmet shell failed. That is an anomoly. I've been jumping these helmets since they first came out and know dozens of others who have them as well. I know of no one who has had a problem like this. Any product can have a mishap in the production. If you have a problem with a Cookie helmet they will take care of it. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

First I'd like to say "good on you" for coming on here and admitting to being the door operator. It very well may not have been your fault. Being a load organizer at multiple events every year with Skyvans I have to open and close the doors 40-50 times each year. I have noticed on several of them that the latches you turn 90 degrees to insert the pins into the holes are getting loose. In fact one this year opened up several times during take off and the door opened up a couple of feet. We could sit there and watch the latch vibrating as it slowly loosened up and turned itself enough to release the pins. I spoke to the pilot about it while on the ground and he told me they were aware of it and it was on the schedule to get fixed. I was nervous about it happening after we latched it open for exit but it never did (on any of our loads at least). I was very careful about making sure it was in the holes and latched as tight as the latch would allow. I've also seen on several Skyvans where the holes that accept the pins have been reamed out over the years. I've suggested to the pilots to replace the strike plates and they've always said they would. If you think you will ever jump a Skyvan, find a person who knows how to open and close the door and ask if he/she will teach you. I've been offering this training for years with few takers. Pride?? . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Over the years I've seen a lot of damage to AADs due to reserve openings. It doesn't happen often but it does happen. They make most AADs pretty tuff these days but when a reserve opens it's a pretty chaotic couple of seconds back there. Anything can happen to cables, connectors, LCDs, etc. I'd wait to see what comes back from the company. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Wingsuiters can't even agree. You seem hell bent on creating yet another boondoggle run by the USPA. Are you going to support "Bigway instructor" ratings next? Some WS'rs are behind this because it will make them money. Some are because they think it will give them legitimacy. Because all the benefits they keep saying this will bring could be brought about by other methods. Me, I don't WS. What I do know is the USPA is too big and does too much unneeded crap already. Some want to make it a bigger organization... One has to wonder why since the benefits could be gained in other ways. I think you need to re-read my post and try really hard not to read betweeen the lines. I really don't care how the sport addresses the issue of wingsuit tail strikes. I don't know enough about wingsuitng to offer anything of value other than to say I know insurance and how that industry works. I now it's possible that someone could be crying wolf to advance their own agenda but if it is true that the company/companies that insure our jump planes get fed up with what ever they perceive to be an unecessary high risk then we will all pay the price. I don't want USPA to be more involved in rulemaking than they already are which is why I hope the wingsuit community gets this figured out on their own. I think if you read my original post you will see it says just that. It does not mention or elude to USPA in any way. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Creating a bureaucracy of an entire new training system to be run by the USPA is like using a shotgun to try and take out a housefly. It might work, but it is going to be messy and overkill. Yeah... uhm... ok ... I'm not sure what you thought I said in my post that led to your response. Creating a bureaucracy ?? entire new training system?? USPA???..... I'm pretty sure I didn't say or even elude to any of that. . You said it is time to do something. 'Find middle ground'. I just used your post to once again state that creating another instructional system is overkill. But, doing something, when not well thought out risks adding BS with little to no benefit. Your posts are just making the point in my original post. Having been in the insurance business for the past 30 years - if I were giving advice to the underwriters of these incidents I would tell them: " It appears that the skydiving community can not find a consensus to address our concerns on these hull damage claims due to "wingsuit jumpers". Our only course of action is to pull the overage of these types of jumps until the skydiving industry can come up with a solution that meets our terms of risk management. Please tell your aircraft owners; It's nothing personal it's only prudent business." > Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Creating a bureaucracy of an entire new training system to be run by the USPA is like using a shotgun to try and take out a housefly. It might work, but it is going to be messy and overkill. Yeah... uhm... ok ... I'm not sure what you thought I said in my post that led to your response. Creating a bureaucracy ?? entire new training system?? USPA???..... I'm pretty sure I didn't say or even elude to any of that. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Well, no-one has yet been able to answer the question I've asked repeatedly, which is: HOW MANY WINGSUIT ACCIDENTS CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO POOR INITIAL TRAINING? John, I know you love wingsuiting and I know you're good at it and don't want to see it be taken out of our sport. You clearly have a passion for this and you, like most, are strong in your convictions and I commend you for that. I don't have enough knowledge of this discipline to take a side. However, in my view - the problem which needs to be addressed immediately is from the perspective of the "Risk Underwriter" - the insurance company. If they perceive that wingsuit jumping is too risky to insure then they will simply remove that risk from the policy i.e. exclusion rider or price that risk so that they can justify the coverage or simply do away with the coverage entirely. If most non-wingsuiters had their drothers I would venture to say they would vote for the exclusion so that they don't have to pony up more money for a jump ticket. I hope it doesn't come to that because I don't want wingsuiting to go away. What I am saying is: now is the time for all sides of this issue to stop bickering and arguing over semantics and instead find some common middle ground and address the concerns of the insurance companies who underwrite the million dollar airplanes from which we jump. You can always go back and tweak the system. There are a lot of businesses that have closed their doors because they could no longer afford the insurance premiums. It's time for cooler heads to prevail. Someone much smarter than I once said "If not us - who? If not now - when?" . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

It wasn't an otter, it was a king air Not defending anyone because this is indefensible but once the load is down to the tandems then (in almost all cases) the only people left are other tandems and those poeple have their own hands full. You could argue that there may be some wingsuiters but the point still stands. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

This is what I posted earlier this year. ***************************************** As a videographer I really don't like it when people try to chase a tandem unless they have impeccable skills and the tandem passenger personally knows them and wants them on the dive. My job is to capture the moment with the best video and stills I can for someone who will likely never make another jump. If someone goes along who is not up to the task they are simply a major distraction for me. I now have to keep an eye out for them to make certain they don't hit me or come up under me which has happened. When I film I don't look at anything other than the tandem unless something is in my field of vision and then I'm not focused on my framing, angles and lighting so it does affect the job I do. And then of course if they don't have the skills to dock then they usually suck at tracking and end up opening very close to me. If you really are their friend then let them have their moment. Go in the plane, have fun with them on the climb, let them see you jump first, geek the camera as you leave and be in the landing area when they land. It makes for much better video and is safer for everyone. Remember the video and stills are about them and their skydive. Don't ruin it for them and the other friends and family who are looking forward to seeing them in freefall. Just MHO. ************************************* To the OP. I totally get that you want to jump with your father and I agree it would be really cool for both of you. So here is what you need to do. Make a lot of jumps and get a ton of experience on your belly. Learn to go out late, dive and dock on other belly flyers. Get to a tunnel and learn as much about belly flying as you can. And jump - jump - jump. Just two weeks ago I filmed a young lady who wanted to chase her friend who was doing a tandem. She has about 400 jumps - almost all doing sit fly and freefly. She was all over the place on her belly and I was trying to keep an eye on her so she wouldn't slide under me. She did slide under the tandem. I did not focus strictly on the tandem as I normally would because my life is more important to me than getting the shot. The video of this person's one and likely only jump was not up to my standard which frankly is quite high. When you jump with your father make certain you are up to the task not only in your opinion but in the opion of others who know your skills. Be safe and have fun when you introduce your dad to what you love. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Good one........ oh... was there a parachute in that clip? . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

In a classic DZ.com fashion, you completely ignore the OP's question and mouth fart some irrelevant garbage about cx150's. Congratulations sir, you are a moron. I'm sorry you feel that way. Maybe if you were aware that Kieth and I are friends from the same area and that we've been talking about various video cameras, still cameras. helmets, and other topics outside of this site you would realize that not only was I was responding to his direct question on here but was adding some information he had inquired about previoulsy. Had you bothered to find out why I responded in the way in which I did, you would have known this. But instead you found it more convient to hide behind your keyboard and childishly call someone whom you know nothing about a name. Typical DZ.com cowardly fashion of someone with no information in their profile. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

. Sandy, As a vidiot, what are your opinions/thoughts on the subject? Have you shot video of TIs pulling "low"? Most of the TIs I shoot are very good and care about the video guy getting back safely. They usually do what you guys have been stating. There is one who insists on taking the spot long and then he opens 1000 feet below everyone else. It's not un-usual for me to saddle out at 2500 feet with him on a long spot. There have been times when I won't wait for him to signal. I just back out fast - float up - turn away and pull while keeping an eye on him to be sure he's not pulling. He once got in a Turbine and got in first with several other tandems (with out video) getting out in front of him/us. I told him I wanted to get out before the other tandems and he said "no - we'll be fine". I did not get on the load and told the DZO that it's not worth the risk for me. It took 5-7 minutes before another video guy could get ready while the prop was turning and burning fuel. I've told manifest that I prefer not to film him. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I don't make that many jumps any more. I'll only make about 350 this year and only 130-140 will be video. Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I've done as much searching as I can stand. I'm not a TI but I do shoot video. > Tandem Instructors < What is your normal wave-off altitude and pull altitude when you have an outside video person? What altitude would you consider dangerous? . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I received the results of the Vigil fire at the Farm and posted them on that thread. Interesting turn of events to say the least. Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

I don't see that happening. Why? Skydave103 posted some stuff in the thread about that incident at the Farm. He obviously jumps at the Farm and had access to both the (inside and outside) videos and - as per his profile - he's a tandem instructor. He was helpful in posting answers to questions from several people on there. Maybe he will provide the results. . Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

There used to be a time when we admitted when we f----d up. We called it taking ownership in our actions or lack thereof. It seems more and more jumpers are expecting their gear to do things for them that they themselves can't do or simply don't learn to. What's even worse is the number of people who simply don't know how their gear actually works. Very seldom does some one admit they used their equipment beyond the design parameters. Even less seldom does someone - who after coming on this site and declaring the "sky is falling" - often by using the term "Misfire" - actually comes back on and admits that they themselves caused the incident. It will be interesting to see if someone comes on and tells why the AAD fired on that tandem in Georgia. Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

Depending on body position, a Vigil AAD will activate between these ranges of altitude: • PRO: 78 + mph -- 840 - 1,100 feet • STUDENT: 45 + mph -- 1,040 - 1,300 feet • TANDEM: 78 +mph -- 2,040 - 2,300 feet Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

As always on this site..... some very good advice like those who have given you drills and things to practice while flying it. And some not so correct advice. I have jumped the OP143 many many times and have always taken it to terminal. I once used it for an entire weekend while I was load organizing at an event. If you are using it as a demo from PD (which it sounds as though you are) then it is set up as a main and the openings will not be painful. One of the participants was using an OP for a main while on the VFS World Record at Skydive Chicago this summer. Believe me - he was going terminal and probably more. My son - who used to work for PD - often used an OP for his main when he did FS jumps bigger than 40 ways. It is an awesome canopy and kudos to you for deciding to find out how it flys before you need to take it into some tight off field landing after it just saved your life. Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

If you "heard" of these incidents and are looking for further details then this information sounds scetchy at best. Are you absolutely certain there were 2 misfires? Are you absolutely certain they were Vigils? If so how did you come to get the information? Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.