frost

Any regular wide angle lens will cause loss of quality. Even Raynox HD lens causes loss of quality. HD footage shot with an SD lens will still look better compared to SD footage. The charts are great, we know that the quality is lost. But then why do people comment on how great and sharp the HD footage looks, even with the loss of quality (especially in the corners), compared to their SD footage?

Less than SD? In HD mode?? How is that possible? While nowhere close to the quality Raynox HD lens, the HD video shot with a Royal .3 or .5 is super nice on regular TV and still looks pretty sharp (definitely much better than SD) on an HD monitor.

i have to disagree. and it does kinda feel natural after doing it for a while, I do it on my regular swoops, without even popping up sometimes. It's almost like a freestyle move now (i modified it just a bit, see pic) and one of my old time swoop heroes called this move "The Dick Scratch". I am going to do that move at the PST and if i stand it up i am naming it just that.

Thank you!! Yeah, as i suspected it is definitely considerably larger the low profile Royal...

I have both Raynox HD3030 and Royal .3 and .5. While for quality HD footage nothing really compares to the Raynox HD, I by far prefer Royal lens for it's size and weight on every day jumps. Since the quality of the Optica is only marginally better in the corners, i think i will stay with the low profile Royal, but it would still be interesting to see a pic of the Optica mounted to the CX100 for the lens dimensions relative to the camera. Thanks

Jay Mo Bobo Neri. Official results(?): http://webscoring.wag2009.com/Parachuting.aspx?R=CP&L=E

A 10 ft half inch PVC pipe can be found at any Home Depot for 2 bucks. Slide the pool noodle over it, leaving about a foot and a half of pipe left. Depending on the hole in the noodle, you may have to cut it top to bottom, then put it on the pipe and tape it with duck tape in a couple of spots. Then go measure your course lay out, make holes in the ground and stick the gates in them. Thats about it.

I must have forgotten... here are some pics of the Neptune on a pillow mounted to a leg strap. SoFPiDaRF - School of Fast Progress in Downsizing and Radical Flying. Because nobody knows your skills better than you.

Comp velo comes with an extra 3 inches of steering line. Did you add 5 more on top of that, CJ? Do you have a video by any chance? There's also Shane's brand new JVX with a bad tail flutter a while back, i dont know if Icarus NZ ever identified what the issue was... Point being, could it be just a manufacturing defect?

This has been covered a while back. You cant compare canopies just by laying them on top of each other, there are other parameters involved. This has also been discussed. Different companies use different measuring methods. PD uses their own, others use a "standard"

Instead, he should probably think about getting off crack. I cant imagine this was a serious discussion between the two of you, but if it was, do ask him to demonstrate the technique personally. And have a camera handy. :)

Some people say the angle changes from top to side and in some flight modes you have to tilt your head to get the shot... i havent had that issue. I have all my cameras top mounted on FTP (for RW video) and on FF (for fun jumps) helmets. After i switched to top mount a few years ago, i think it's the best way to have it. I guess it's a matter of personal preference, i saw the CX100 side mounted on a Tonfly last weekend and i think it looks goofy. Looks like Johnny 5. No disassemble!!

go back to bonfire buddy

aww... really? you're just hurting my feelings... i am gonna go cry now. What's up with deleting your post like a little girl? if you have an opinion stand up and fight for it, dont be a little sissy. not to worry i quoted it for you.

I love hearing the personal "success" stories of the "but i do it this way" beginner skydivers. Just last weekend we were laughing very hard at the "yeah, i know, but..." folks in Jeffro's camp. If you already "know", then there is no reason to take the course. If you are taking the course, then listen, don't talk over your instructor's advice. "Yeah, i know that Bill Von's and Brian Germain's guide lines say that i am way ahead of myself, but!! I make a 100 jumps a year and i dont stop jumping even in the winter! So even though they say i shouldn't downsize and i respect their experience, i am thinking of downsizing." Fucking great! Go for it. You, as well as some others on this site, are a "know it all 100 jump wonder" with 20 times more posts than jumps, who got called out and ridiculed for his "expert" advice in serious topics, possibly related to the "we've gone at each other throat" comment? Wrong. Me and billvon have been at each other throats, but he at least has A LOT of experience and is an expert in the subject matter he speaks of. You? you just speak. we've never been at each other throats, that would be a waste of my time. P.S. in no way should this be considered a personal attack, this is simply a statement of fact.

There is a big difference between manufacturer recommended wing loadings for a particular canopy type and size (which will probably always remain on the conservative side for obvious reasons) and defining the skill levels attached to each term as per original poster. Let's not confuse the two. I think PD and Icarus definitions are excellent for clarifying what those skill levels mean and Brian's chart is a great guide line for people that fall in between those categories.

Luigi Cani is someone all of us used to look up to, a well known pilot and a respected veteran of the sport with more experience than 99% of people on this forum. With that much experience it is very easy to forget what it's like to downsize from a docile square 175 to a high performance elliptical 135 with 54 jumps under your belt. It is also a very common thing to hear new jumpers say: "i am only doing straight approaches, i dont do anything dumb, i dont want to swoop, i have good reflexes, i've been racing motorcycles my whole life, studied martial arts, i will not downsize any time soon" etc. etc. I, as most, have heard them all, no need to waste your time trying to justify yourself. It seems you have already found all the reasons and justifications as to why you need a faster canopy. Good for you. I assume you are a grown man and can make your own decisions. It is your life after all. Just remember, it is not what you do in normal conditions that will cause you to make an error and get hurt. It is what you will do or fail to do in an emergency situation like an off-DZ landing. And also remember that when this happens, people WILL point fingers laughing and saying "we told you so".

This might do: http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/W-L_Interpretations.pdf or this: http://www.icaruscanopies.aero/choosing.htm SoFPiDaRF - School of Fast Progress in Downsizing and Radical Flying. Because nobody knows your skills better than you.

According to some manufacturers, a wing loading of 1.3 for this size/type of canopy is somewhere in between "Advanced" and "Expert". At 54 jumps a pilot can hardly be considered either one. You are about 300 jumps ahead of yourself, moving too fast. Please reconsider your choices, it's in your own best interests.

wow. 5 perfect meets! I think got a zero in one round, but that was the highest score, so i still got 100 points!! Yes! I am fucking winning.

one big happily f-d up family may be. I'm just glad i'm normal, but i cant say that for the rest of these guys... BTW, i get... ahem... "jazzed" when i compete with McSissy and Kaz and even Drennan. Yet i still get treated like a lower class citizen. WTF, over? I have a pro card! So in closing, can i just have a separate score sheet next year? With just me on it? That way i can always be number 1. Thank you.

That was the original intent, league is aimed towards the Ams, to get them into CP competition scene and make it less intimidating. But hearing someone who's barely making 10 foot gates and flying a short speed course brag how he beat the speed record makes me smile. Then again, some of the amateurs these days are as good or better than some of the Pros. I think they need (and want) a solid challenge, not a "hand out" top 5-10 placement. Their goal is to get better, learn as much as they can and compete as Pros next year, not compare themselves to Pro scores based on huge handicaps, no? Especially with the new Speed score changes and its weigh in the total score overall. But i agree that having Ams compare their scores against a handicapped Pro score is a positive thing, something that will help keep them interested in competing and growing. So that's why i think we can and should keep the overall score but still have the two separate score sheets/divisions for Pros and Ams.

Some great pics from the FLCPA comp at The Farm by Andrey Veselov: http://www.skyphoto.ru/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=65

i guess misunderstood you about the prizes, my bad. as far as separate score sheets... Yeah basically thats the idea. we've been doing that last couple of meets. Might as well make it official, i agree. If this happens, we can still make the Overall standings score available too, just for the hell of it.

We started getting an unofficial "Pro" score sheet after Atlanta meet by removing the Ams from the spreadsheet to show just the Pro scoring. That's a matter of one minute and actually, to me, is a better representation of how we did in our "divisions", so to speak. But the extra break down of payouts, prizes and all that... might prove too much logistical work for the judges. I think changing the speed course to match the length of the Pro/USPA/FAI/IPC course is a big step towards leveling out the field and giving Ams a better challenge, which is what it's all about.