sabre210

What's a blind panic??? You learn that on your FJC???? I don't need no toggle fumble in order to pile in, mastered that one with a straight in approach into wind, both toggles in hands. To do this requires more than lack of skill, lack of judgement and lack of altitude.....it requires a lack of that special something extra.

You may be surprised at how low you can static line an unvented canopy. In my experience the vents make a much bigger difference on freefalls than static lines, for no reason I can explain. This is something i have wondered about. How low are we talking about???(and no i won't take this as gospel and go out and do it) Would you, given the choice, opt for a vented canopy for a low SL or would it not be a factor you would consider relevant AT ALL. Maybe it doen't make that much difference purely because of the very low airspeed a jumper has achieved before deployment on a static line jump. It's got to be more than Ju Ju. Discounting beach/very soft mud landings, what is your hard deck for repeatable SL jumps over hard ground??? I stress repeatable cos any fool could SL low and break both their legs. Is this a discussion you'd prefer to have over at Blinc????

Quote Gang, gang. I wasn't trying to disparage those who SL extremely low stuff. (beckons to the mob) HE WAS, HE WAS.... and he called all your mothers whores. Burn, burn ...... Hard deck?....As i mentioned, my lowest jump to date was a 160ft B which although low (to me) wasn't as bad as i was expecting. Easily had time to get the toggles off and a nice flare, so I will definitely go lower, especially after observing the 130ft B the other night, again toggles off and nice flare for both jumpers involved. I currently jump an ACE (no vents or valves) so my hard deck is a bit higher to allow for pressurisation. Nick DG. Thanks for the info. Would be keen to hear more. ian

The only thing like that that I've done was a PCA from 210 and I was sort of disappointed that I didn't get much ground rush. Now a PCA/SL from 150? That might be interesting. 210 is most definitely a comfortable pca/sl jump height (assuming it's over a decent landing area. From personal experience 160ft B is pants cackingly ground rush city.....providing of course you keep your eyes open. Now i know there are jumpers out there who could comment on 130ft s/l building jumps over concrete and spikey railings. Interesting is probably not the most appropriate adjective to describe this. Hope to jump with you some day Zennie.

Several years ago the big topic of debate was whether static lines counted as BASE jumps or not. What was the general consensus? And was PCA bundled in there for good measure as it is effectively the same?

Hi Rod Can't stress enough that this isn't a dig at zennie no more than it is a dig at Mac, who i know, respect and have shared an exit point with on more than one occasion. I just am keen to know why static line seems to be perceived as the poor man's BASE jump.

Perhaps someone can chime in and comment on whether or not the BASE pioneers static lined stuff but I always assumed they did..... Gus......yes they did static line . I have some amazing footage of early static line jumps done by Carl and Jean(at the canyon ). Jean was awesome, stepping up to be the first to jump whilst others waited to see the outcome. Carl stood by watching this amazing woman leap into the unknown. His comments to her over the radio after she lands just show how utterly proud he was of her "you had amazing form" i believe were his words. great stuff

I would like to reiterate my initial point that of course BASE is a personal thing and no one has to justify the jumps they make. What interests me though is why some people steer clear of static line jumps. We do (i hope) approach BASE with a logical scientific mind, assessing the options available to us on every jump so i assume there must be a good reason for not wanting to static line an object. IS it the perception that it must be a low jump therefore more risky, is it the added complexities in rigging the jump, is it just a gut feeling that SL isn't a real BASE jump??? Genuinely curious.

Quoteafter a post by a UK friend in response to someone saying -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That might make a nice SL... but I'm a bit of a purist... if it ain't freefallable I won't jump it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hiya Zennie Now BASE is of course an incredibly personal thing and generally speaking there are no rights and wrongs. One person's dream jump is another person's nightmare, so please don' t think I'm trying to convert you (so to speak), it's just your comment and your use of the word 'purist' gets me thinking. Why do you consider static line to be less of a BASE jump than say a freefall. And would that also apply to a DB and PCA. This 'purist' approach has, i know, nothing to do with safety margins, as a 190ft sl will give you more canopy time than a 230ft freefall. Don't get me wrong, i'm really not having a go, i just would be keen to know why you turn your back on thousands, no tens of thousands of jumpable exhilarating, balls to the wall objects just because they might fall 10feet below your FF harddeck. Similarly, there are thousands of objects which ARE freefallable but have nasty fences or small tricky landings which are waiting to screw you up if you have anything less than a perfect on-heading opening. In these instances, isn't it preferable to SL it to get an idea first of the lay of the land. The whole world is jumpable. It just happens to be more jumpable to people willing to static line every now and then. A static line is no less of jump believe me. Ask Spence or Slim or Jean B. I believe this might make an interesting seperate thread Tom. With the greatest respect.

That might make a nice SL... but I'm a bit of a purist... if it ain't freefallable I won't jump it. Hiya Zennie Now BASE is of course an incredibly personal thing and generally speaking there are no rights and wrongs. One person's dream jump is another person's nightmare, so please don' t think I'm trying to convert you (so to speak), it's just your comment and your use of the word 'purist' gets me thinking. Why do you consider static line to be less of a BASE jump than say a freefall. And would that also apply to a DB and PCA. This 'purist' approach has, i know, nothing to do with safety margins, as a 190ft sl will give you more canopy time than a 230ft freefall. Don't get me wrong, i'm really not having a go, i just would be keen to know why you turn your back on thousands, no tens of thousands of jumpable exhilarating, balls to the wall objects just because they might fall 10feet below your FF harddeck. Similarly, there are thousands of objects which ARE freefallable but have nasty fences or small tricky landings which are waiting to screw you up if you have anything less than a perfect on-heading opening. In these instances, isn't it preferable to SL it to get an idea first of the lay of the land. The whole world is jumpable. It just happens to be more jumpable to people willing to static line every now and then. A static line is no less of jump believe me. Ask Spence or Slim or Jean B. I believe this might make an interesting seperate thread Tom. With the greatest respect.

The mystery deepens. If it was a 3500ft A with elevator to the top in 3mins, no guy wires, a running exit platform, 5 square kilometres of uninterupted soft green pasture at the foot of it and a coffee and donut shop on site, you're shit out of luck. I think it just got pulled down.

Just to reiterate what Tom and co have already mentioned, but absolutely not. A 42" pc could quite happily configure with a slider up and and slider down jump. A power tower we jump has two platforms, one at 350 another at 650. I have jumped stowed 42" from both heights, the latter being slider up. I'd rather not gamble on the outcome of mistakenly taking the slider up pack off the lower platform with a 2 sec delay, based on the assumption that a 42 meant it was slider down. That could be a very costly assumption to make.

That looked like a leg breaker to me too. Nasty. Hope he was okay.

Bullet Cam set up is nice and like you rightly point out, everything is kept away neatly in the "bum bag" or as you boys call it "fanny pack". This reduces snag potential and allows for easy re-configuration of the camera direction. However, It can be bulky around the waist and there seems to be a sound arguement that it WILL affect your tracking on terminal jumps. Maybe it's more of a head fuck than anything else but if you feel it's going to make a difference, then it probably will.

You obviously don't get the quality girls in Vancouver you get in HOT ROCKS eh Spence. See you again at the Heli boogie. Worried now aint ya.