jalisco

Actually, I think you might want to get a couple of empty 3-liter coke bottles and duct-tape them to your camelbak...

Out of a couple of relatives and a couple of acquantainces who are or were park rangers of various ilks, I can say that none of the ones I know had the slightest interest in law enforcement as far as I can tell. They got there because they decided, outdoorsmen that they were sitting in classes in college, that they didn't want to wind up behind a desk all day somewhere. I wonder if the the park service, trying to maintain some sort of wildness (or at least naturalness) aren't a little overwhelmed by the teaming masses of intransigent humans streamin through "their" parks, and don't look on everybody as a problem. I also wonder if they aren't a little proprietary too. Like, as long as you're just a bovine tourist passing through on well-worn trails to gawk at the park, and they've got one up on you (welcome to our park, got any questions?), they're fine. But if you're more agressive in your approach to nature, learning things or seeking a relationship with nature that's beyond (or at least outside of) their experiences, then you threaten their proprietary position. Like, you can all come meet my girlfriend, but don't be touching anything past the elbows...

There's More rubbish from the Papers, in which Professor David Ball "worked out a relative risk factor for each sport"...

The "parachuting" that they apparently occasionally allow is from aircraft, and the policy declaration you site discusses "BASE jumping" in particular. I think this is pretty clearly irrational, since somewhat more destructive use of the cliffs is allowed (climbing), and parachuting is also occasionally allowed. One can only assume that the policy, given the declaration is not accompanied by any justification, in fact has no justification.

Burying them in permit requests all at once might be irritating, and, if you happen to think that some of their concerns might be allayed by instituting an "expert review" permitting process, might just highlight how much of a hassle such a permiting process could be if a whole bunch of BASE jumpers started doing that on a regular basis. If you think lots of us requesting permits might gain us something, maybe a steady stream would be better. But I'm wondering whether those inside the NPS who already think we're a pain in the ass wouldn't just dig in their heels even more. I'm thinking that a steady stream of polite, informative letters to decision makers might be preferable.

My personal experience () is that the deeper your dbs, the more altitude you'll burn trying to riser turn (the rate at which you can turn by slowing down one side of your canopy depends on how much forward speed the other side has, right?). Anyway, with dbs on the non-vented canopy I was trying out (from a low object in the dark, instead of from several grand in the daylight, which would have made too much sense apparently) set close to a stand-still, popping toggles would have been the right option in almost every case I can think of -- collision would have to be really imminent before I'd spend most of the rest of my altitude with risers in my hands staring down the object. You folks with real experience please correct me if I wrong, Thanks!

"Old School" - respectful in a hip-hop sorta way "Grandfathers" sounds Lakota or something "Titans" (they came before the gods) Agreed -- Sounds a bit derisive, doesn't it? How bout just "non-jumper" -- or "ground crew" works in some contexts

Looks like the 21CSHRX is designed as a very low-light (.1lux at f2!) camera. It must push the Sony EXVIEW Super HAD 1/3" CCD to the limit -- the "blue spot" artifacting is something that another manufacturer might tune out, but I like the fact that it'll give you whatever low-light image it can get. Was hoping someone would chime in on the battery thing. The specs for the 21CSHRX state: From what you guys are saying, it sounds like the tolerance they claim is a little iffy when you get on the low side.

Just so's nobody gets the wong idea, you do mean that the person is not actually taking a longer delay -- it just looks like they took a longer delay because the pc takes longer to inflate, right?

Not a lawyer, but I think lawrocket was just saying that it takes two people (or more) in collusion in order for there to be a "conspiracy" charge. If you go there all by yourself, and no one else worked with you to develop a plan to get you there and/or jump, then you wouldn't expect there be any conspiracy charge. However, there could still be an "intent" charge (presumably).

I believe that's the current version of mine (which are a few years old and can't be found on their web site now). I love them. Do yours have the removable ankle support? I'm curious how well that works -- whether the inserts are easy to carry, easy to insert in the dark, at the exit point, etc.

Anybody tried Crispi's Airborne GTX?

Cool -- the sony 1/3"ccd is what the 330 has, right? so if they did it right, the only thing you're missing is the Sony image stab (and odds and ends like night mode, progressive scan, etc). I'd also be interested to learn about your setup.

Bullet cam is a complete camera, ccd, lens, etc., that puts out a standard video signal (NTSC or PAL). Your dv recorder is then just recording the video signal the bullet cam produces. If you're using it to feed, say, a PC330, then your investment in the 330's fancy (bigger) ccd, pretty glass, and image stabilization is for naught. Image quality will depend almost entirely on the quality of the bullet cam. I wouldn't expect most of them to give you the sensitivity or color fidelity you get from your better mini-dv cameras (stand-alone). But, somebody please prove me wrong -- I like the idea.

Must be a lot of them in this part of the US (southeast). If I'm out roamin around in the woods (for some reason), I'll stand out more in city gear like jeans or whatever -- camo is expected. In town, jeans would be fine, although there's a lot of camo in town, too. People here like to advertise that they're a hunter/outdoorsman or whatever.

looks like about 10-15% more cross-sectional area ... won't that mean a significant difference in snatch force?

South Carolina Code of Laws SECTION 10-11-10. Walking on roof of State House. It shall be unlawful for any person, without the permission of the State Budget and Control Board or a member of that Board, to enter upon or walk upon the roof of the State House. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than thirty days on the public works of Richland County for each offense. SECTION 16-11-600. Entry on another's pasture or other lands after notice; posting notice. Every entry upon the lands of another where any horse, mule, cow, hog or any other livestock is pastured, or any other lands of another, after notice from the owner or tenant prohibiting such entry, shall be a misdemeanor and be punished by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment with hard labor on the public works of the county for not exceeding thirty days. When any owner or tenant of any lands shall post a notice in four conspicuous places on the borders of such land prohibiting entry thereon, a proof of the posting shall be deemed and taken as notice conclusive against the person making entry, as aforesaid, for the purpose of trespassing. SECTION 16-11-640. Unlawful entry into enclosed places. It shall be unlawful for any person not an occupant, owner or invitee to enter any private property enclosed by walls or fences with closed gates between the hours of six P.M. and six A.M. The provisions of this section shall not apply to any justifiable emergency entry or to premises which are not posted with clearly visible signs prohibiting trespass upon the enclosed premises. The provisions of this section are supplemental to existing law relating to trespass and punishment therefor. Any person who violates the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than two hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than thirty days. don't think this applies to closed/locked buildings and private dwellings, which are covered elsewhere So, basically, in SC, if you want someone to stay off your property, you should post at least 4 conspicuous "No Trespassing" signs, or one sign if you've completely enclosed it with a fence or wall. Course there's probably case law that applies, too. And maybe some applicable federal and/or local laws. Oh well, that's what lawyers are for, right?

And I suppose you'd want to set up a trust or llc to own the thing -- I'm thinking it's one thing to own a tower, fence it and post it "no trespassing," and quite another to own a tower and knowingly allow people to recreationally climb and jump the thing (perhaps inciting neighborhood minors to a little climbing misadventure?)...

I think that's an important "but" -- in my very very limited experience, seems like I have seen a few people take short/no delays in response to gear- or exit-point-nervousness, and I'm thinking that it's often the wrong response. I saw a few shrivel flaps take their time peeling after go and throws last weekend. Seems like a little speed can improve deployment by increasing instantaneous loading (snatch), and, of course, a little time puts you further from the object, both in terms of your trajectory, and sometimes because of the shape of the overhang. So, taking a little more delay improves your chances of a good deployment, even though it might seem counter-intuitive (since it's leaving you a little less time). Maybe I'm either stating the obvious, or am mistaken somehow -- either case, maybe I'll learn from your responses.

I checked out the video. I haven't really studied very many deployments on video, but in the few I have seen, seems like the pc, canopy and jumper are all pretty much in a line. Is it common for the pc to be that far aft of the canopy during deployment? Maybe there was a gust, or some kind of pc ocillation? Or am I just seeing the pc fall down behind the canopy after it's done its job?

for me either

wrk sux can't stay in my seat for more than 15min at a time must go back and jump some the exits i missed thx everyone

I don’t have my rig in front of me but I think it’s impossible to bring it out the center and NOT tuck the bridle with the pin flap on a Vertex. I think I see what you're saying... K also said: Maybe she meant to be careful to keep the slack on top of the pins and not to tuck any of of it under with the pin flap? Useful thread. Thanks!!!

I heard a Tibetan monk (with a group that was in town for some multicultural something or other) say that numbers like that, which are "1" more than some power of ten or multiple, are very auspicious. He said they indicate progression and growth. So, I think 1001 is a cool number (I guess I'm impressionable that way).

MaryAnne's a runner (training for a half right now) and a climber. She'll probably bring her climbing harness and shoes, although she doesn't have much gear beyond that (a couple biners, draws and runners maybe). Does Maya climb at all? Maybe some local expert could be enlisted to lead something fun. I'm sure she'll want to get in a run or two and would no doubt love to check out the local scenery. Not worried about K's companion...MaryAnne can either kick his @$$ or outrun him, at her discretion, should the need arise (I'm sure he's a perfect gentleman)