velvetjo

Members
  • Content

    288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by velvetjo

  1. Unless you're somehow putting a dedicated cutaway system on the G3, the term "safest" doesn't even remotely apply to your question. Hint: fastex buckles don't release easily under tension. As for Grant's reply being negative, I'm impressed that you can figure out what the hell he said...known him for years and I still have trouble with his syntax on here.
  2. You'll be a lot more maneuverable with big wings in the same situation than you are now clinging to the edge of your fall rate range. Cordura booties with pockets will definitely help to balance the big wings, but I have a 2-piece camera suit without booties and it's still pretty manageable with large wings. Lance
  3. Raynox 0.5 or 0.3 are good video choices for tandem to complement a Canon 10-22 still lens. Which one depends somewhat on your flying style & typical exit configuration, but either will work. Lance
  4. Booties and wings together can give you more options for combinations of fall rates & angles. Lance
  5. Yep, shit happens sometimes. Gotta take a hit for the team once in a while.
  6. So, tell us about some of your off landings as a TI. Sounds like you're pretty experienced with them. Got any good tips for how to keep Granny's ankles intact in a soybean field on a no-wind day? Lance
  7. In 13 years of full time skydiving, I've never seen this "shortage" of TI's. And assuming there is a shortage, why would you suspect the the medical is the bottle neck? Who said anything about a shortage now? Tighten up the medical to Class 2 and it will weed out more TM's from the finite number available. Lance
  8. Diablo, I agree with your point in general, and have no problem with the idea of requiring a Class 2 medical for TM's in principle. That said, there are two big factors in play: 1 - limited supply of TM candidates doesn't allow for that level of medical scrutiny 2 - FAA doesn't regulate tandem licenses directly The current system seems like a reasonable compromise between the aviation medical system and our self-regulated world. But, I'm betting that if we have any high-profile tandem student injuries or fatalities, you'll see #2 change and we'll all be looking at Class 2 medicals as TM's. The FAA is letting sport pilots self-certify medicals now with a valid driver's license, but that's for strictly non-commercial stuff. They draw a pretty hard line with lots of things at commercial vs, non-commercial. For that reason, I wouldn't be surprised if the FAA pushes back on USPA for the proposed DOT vs. FAA medical change. Lance
  9. You might find this thread helpful. I had similar concerns and it generated some interesting points. I've done tandems when needed over the last couple of seasons, and one of the scariest was a lady who could barely demonstrate an arch or lift her legs for landing. I let her know that if she didn't, we weren't going. That motivated her enough to at least show me that she could. On the way to the boarding area I asked her what she did for a living and she responded: "corporate lawyer." Predictably, she was more like cargo than a participant in the jump. I'm still not sure why I took her. Despite all that, tandems can be a real blast with a good student. Lance
  10. The model numbers are not the same. Zlew gave you an easy way to check the models that dragon provided earlier in this thread as EIS. Buying online may be your only option for some of the older models that are EIS. Please pay attention and fill out your profile. Lance
  11. A NOTAM for skydiving does not clear the airspace for jumpers. VFR flying in uncontrolled airspace is see-and-avoid, no matter whether you're flying a Cub with no radio, the Goodyear blimp, a hot air balloon, an F-18, a Life Flight helicopter, or a student canopy. You'll likely have the right of way as an unpowered craft, but it's definitely not worth it to be "dead right". We all need to be prepared for evasive action in situations like this. Like it or not, it's shared airspace. With pressures like user fees facing all of us who work and play in it, we're a lot better off finding ways to help each other than making comments like "Dr. Cessna". Lance
  12. Around the first time you do 10+ instructor and/or video jumps in a day, you'll figure out that it's work.
  13. They saw that you only have 166 jumps. It'll probably ship around the time you make your 200th. Lance
  14. Don't rely on the mount breaking or the helmet's normal release system for any camera helmet. Use a cutaway system. Lance
  15. I've had good results with those lenses on a CX100 with the manual focus between 1.4 - 2.0m. Infinity wasn't sharp up close. Are you zoomed in at all? Lance
  16. I'm not in a high volume situation, so I chose to keep my editing PC protected with antivirus despite the performance hit. That said, I can still render a SD tandem video on Vegas in 2-3 minutes or less (i7 CPU with 6 GB RAM). I've had good success with ESET Smart Security. It's nowhere near the memory pig that the Symantec & McAfee products can be. I also like the idea that I can get multiple licenses on the web for multiple years at a healthy discount. Lance
  17. I like the way your flash bracket mounts, that's a nice design for stability. The red cutaway cable is just for opening the hinge? I jump a Canon 10-22 as well, and I'd recommend that you add some blocking between the lens and the helmet. It's got a fairly fragile connection point within the lens that can break with pressure from the top (like standing up too soon under the door). Your flash bracket makes it less likely, but it was an expensive lesson for me. Lance
  18. With a CX100 and Raynox 3030, I get sharp results with the manual focus between 1.4m - 1.8m. Autofocus is sometimes problematic when panning across blue sky, so I find manual a better bet overall. Lance
  19. I was a friend of Frank's, and I can make one of his tongue switches for you if you'd like. My current switch is on its fourth season of tandem videos and still going strong. I build them for friends occasionally. PM me for details. We jumped together in Hazleton for a bunch of years - what an incredible guy. I really miss him! Lance
  20. I agree with you in terms of instantaneous climb rate. Same issue that pcchapman had above. I disagree about horizontal movement over the ground. Additional climb rate from a standing wave decays less from a stationary position over the ground, once you've found a sweet spot. If the jump pilot gets extra climb rate from a wave, he'll be in the wave longer when facing into the wind and get more benefit from it. Here's a question for both of you fellows: which do you think is more important to the jump pilot in question (or any typical jump pilot) - instantaneous or sustained climb rate? Being practical folks, I'm guessing most pilots are talking in terms of sustained climb rate, because that's what actually makes a difference to them. You both sound like reasonably intelligent guys, but the phrase "deliberately obtuse" keeps coming to mind as I type these replies. I guess my only point is that the pilot may have been right, at least from his perspective. As both an aero engineer and a pilot, I think a lot of engineers could benefit from more practical thinking. Lance
  21. Please re-read what I wrote: sustained climb rate. You're saying the same thing with different words, and seem to be focused on instantaneous climb rate for some reason. Exactly how are these excluded from the conversation? Lots of pilots do these all the time in the course of a normal flight, even though they might not call it the same thing you do or even consciously realize they're doing them. If you don't, maybe you're just doing it wrong?
  22. Over the right parts of certain terrain features (which aren't always obvious from the ground), facing upwind or downwind can definitely influence a sustained climb rate. Think of it as surfing a standing wave in a river versus running with the current. Lance
  23. Get real. The issue that made this whole thing so muddy was Private Pilots flying jumpers for no pay to build hours. The FAA then interpreted the flight time itself as compensation, which was a de facto declaration that you need to be a Commercial Pilot to fly for a commercial DZ. On the other hand, if we owned a 182, my Private Pilot wife could fly me and me buddies on jump loads legally all day long since she's not being compensated, even by flight time. We should even be able to split fuel costs among all parties, although there's probably some FSDO bozo willing to make an issue of that if the local hangar tool reported it. If you disagree, please cite the FAR or interpretation you're basing you opinion on. I call BS on the repacks, etc. Lance